Israeli settlers stoning Palestinian citizens <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Jw_Px5cJIyI&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Jw_Px5cJIyI&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> Israeli settlers block Palestinian path, assault intl's <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/eYu9eSOhf7M&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/eYu9eSOhf7M&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> Israeli Settlers Set Fire to Palestinian Olive Tree <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OTVNyXhxqFc&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OTVNyXhxqFc&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
Settlers throw stones at woman and baby <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2EUUrE8Lm14&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2EUUrE8Lm14&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> Let's Stone Children <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EI3pbEteBlk&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EI3pbEteBlk&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> Israelis stoning innocent people <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LmQbqv9fizY&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LmQbqv9fizY&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
israeli/ jewish settlers loot, burn and destroy Palestinian <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/8kzgXSOkx50&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8kzgXSOkx50&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
the kassam rockets fired from the arab terrorists squatting in gaza in the land of israel continue to rain down on israel in the past year alone 1000's of rockets have been fired onto israel targeting innocent men women and children. these monsters have hit the most vulnerable innocent targets such as a kindergarden while mr olmert discusses "peace" its disgraceful. below is kassam attack caught on security camera tape of a man that was critically wounded by a kassam missle while working to support his family and another video which a rocket fired from arab terrorists in gaza on the city of sderot on a kindergarden. thats right, a kindergarden! you're not going to beleive what you're about to see and maybe understand what israel has to deal with here. <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/y0eSX84Y38A&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/y0eSX84Y38A&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JM942_i28JA&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JM942_i28JA&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
look at the terrorists using cluster bombs on civillians. These people are so evil. These people hate our freedoms and are a threat to peace. Israel wants and needs war, what a backward society. -------------------------------------------------------------- Israeli cluster bomb use 'legal' [ Post 295977313 ] : Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7159569.stm Israeli military prosecutors say the army's much-criticised deployment of cluster bombs in last year's Lebanon war was legal under international law The Israeli army announced there would be no indictments against officers who used them, after a year-long enquiry. "The use of the weaponry was a concrete military necessity," a statement said. The UN called Israel's cluster bombing "shocking and immoral", as most were used in the last 72 hours of fighting when a resolution was clearly imminent. According to the inquiry by the head of the army's Defence College, the majority of cluster bombs were dropped in open areas and their use in urban areas was an "immediate response" to target areas that were being used as launch pads by Hezbollah guerrillas. The findings were accepted by the army's Judge Advocate General Avihai Mandelblit. The UN says about four million cluster bomblets were dropped on Lebanon during the 34-day conflict. Many of them failed to explode on impact, posing a danger to civilians in their homes, gardens and fields. More than 30 people have been reported killed by cluster bomb and land mine explosions since the 2006 war. Although cluster bombs are not illegal under the laws of war, campaigners say their use in populated areas constitutes an indiscriminate attack on civilians.
Hezbollah rockets blast into Israel Jewish residents hide in bomb shelters as military responds Posted: November 21, 2005 9:51 a.m. Eastern By Aaron Klein WorldNetDaily.com JERUSALEM â While Israel's television networks broadcast continuous coverage of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's resignation and call for new elections today, Hezbollah fired dozens of rockets at Israeli neighborhoods along the Lebanese border, prompting Jewish residents to hide in bomb shelters and the Israeli Defense Forces to respond with artillery. The attack follows warnings by Israeli military officials that Syrian and Iranian-backed Hezbollah has been trying to draw the Jewish state into a confrontation. An Israeli diplomat also has warned that Iran recently supplied Hezbollah with 10,000 new missiles. Hezbollah shot Katyusha rockets and mortars from its positions in southern Lebanon into Israeli communities at Har Dov, near Israel's border with Syria and Lebanon. Four Israeli troops were injured, one critically. Hezbollah terrorists also fired light arms at Israeli farmers working in fields near the border. Jewish residents in and near border towns were told to enter private and community-owned bomb shelters. The Israeli Defense Forces responded with artillery fire at Hezbollah positions. Moshe Sasonkin, a rabbi stationed at a community near the Lebanese border for the world Chabad Jewish outreach movement, said he was stunned by the Hezbollah attack. "I don't remember such a situation in all of the 16 years that I have lived here," Sasonkin told Shturem.net, a new online Chabad news site. "This is the first time that there was a direct hit [on our community.] The IDF cut off all eletricity in the city, we are told to stay put in our shelters, close the windows and not light any cigarettes. This is war." Israel's northern border with Lebanon has been on high alert the past two weeks, with intelligence officials warning information indicated Hezbollah has been planning to attack Israeli towns and kidnap Israeli civilians and soldiers in a bid to draw Israel into a conflict. A senior security official told WND last week that Syria is "being internationally isolated and is under extreme fire" because of the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri in February, for which Damascus has been blamed in a recent United Nations report. "Syria needs a distraction," the official said, "they need a conflict with Israel." The official also said Israel would "respond carefully to any attack. We will not give [Syrian President Bashar] Assad the conflict he wants." Today's rocket fire comes after Israel's new deputy ambassador to the UnitedStates, Jeremy Issacharoff, warned Iran supplied Hezbollah with more than10,000 short-range rockets, most of which have been deployed in southern Lebanon within reach of Israel. The rockets, some of which were also funded by Syria, have a range of up to110 kilometers â about 68 miles, Issacharoff announced last week at a conference on Iran. "In Israeli terms, that range can be a heavyweight," said Issacharoff. ERR...no i would say the katyusha rockets fired from lebanon in to israel who declared war on israel long before the official declaration of war in the summer of 06. were illegal.
Worth reading, our Zionist controlled media only tells 1/2 the story. -------------------------------------------------------------- Evidence of Israeli 'cowardly blending' comes to light [ Post 295985236 ] Category: News & Opinion (Specific) Topic: Warfare and Conflict: Israel-Palestine Published: January 4, 2008 Author: Jonathan Cook . It apparently never occurred to anyone in our leading human rights organisations or the Western media that the same moral and legal standards ought be applied to the behaviour of Israel and Hizbullah during the war on Lebanon 18 months ago. Belatedly, an important effort has been made to set that right. A new report, written by a respected Israeli human rights organisation, one representing the countryâs Arab minority not its Jewish majority, has unearthed evidence showing that during the fighting Israel committed war crimes not only against Lebanese civilians -- as was already known -- but also against its own Arab citizens. This is an aspect of the war that has been almost entirely neglected until now. The report also sheds a surprising light on the question of what Hizbullah was aiming at when it fired hundreds of rockets on northern Israel. Until the reportâs publication last month, I had been all but a lone voice arguing that the picture of what took place during the war was far more complex than generally accepted. The new report follows a series of inquiries by the most influential human rights groups, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, to identify the ways in which international law was broken during Israelâs 34-day assault on Lebanon. However, both organisations failed to examine, except in the most cursory and dismissive way, Israelâs treatment of its own civilians during the war. That failure may also have had serious repercussions for their ability to assess Hizbullahâs actions. Before examining the reportâs revelations, it is worth revisiting the much-misrepresented events of summer 2006 and considering what efforts have been made subsequently to bring the two sides to account. The war was the culmination of a series of tit-for-tat provocations along the shared border following Israelâs withdrawal from its two-decade occupation of south Lebanon in 2000. Almost daily for those six years Israel behaved as though the occupation had not ended, sending war planes into Lebanese air space to create terrifying sonic booms and spy on the country. (After the war, it resumed these flights almost immediately.) In response Hizbullah, a Shia militia that offered the only effective resistance during Lebanonâs period of occupation, maintained its belligerent posture. It warned repeatedly that it would capture Israeli soldiers, should the chance arise, in the hope of forcing a prisoner exchange. Israel had held on to a handful of Lebanese prisoners after its pullback. Hizbullah also demanded that Israel complete its withdrawal from Lebanon in full by leaving a fertile sliver of territory, the Shebaa Farms. Israel argues that the area is Syrian territory, occupied by its army along with the Golan Heights in 1967, and will be returned one day in negotiations with Damascus. UN catrographers disagree, backing Hizbullahâs claim that the area is Lebanese. The fighting began with a relatively minor incident (by regional standards) and one that was entirely predictable: Hizbullah attacked a border post, capturing two soldiers and killing three more in the operation. Hizbullahâs leader Hassan Nasrallah proposed a prisoner swap. Israel declared war the very same day, unleashing a massive bombing campaign that over the next month killed nearly 1,200 Lebanese civilians. An editorial in Israelâs leading newspaper Haaretz noted again this week that, by rejecting Hizbullahâs overtures, âIsrael initiated the warâ. In the last days of the fighting, as a UN-brokered ceasefire was about to come into effect, Israel dropped more than a million cluster bombs on south Lebanon, of which several hundred thousand failed to detonate. Since the end of the war, 39 Lebanese civilians have been killed and dozens more maimed from these small landmines littering the countryside. Israelâs own inquiry into its use of the cluster munitions wrapped up last month by exonerating the army, even while admitting that many of the bombs had been directed at civilian population centres. In Israelâs books, it seems, international law sanctions the targeting of civilians during war. Veteran Israeli reporter Meron Rapoport recently noted that his newspaper, Haaretz again, has evidence that the armyâs use of cluster munitions was âpre-plannedâ and undertaken without regard to the location of Hizbullah positions. The only reasonable conclusion is that Israel wanted south Lebanon uninhabitable at any cost, possibly so that another ground invasion could be mounted. Human Rights Watch, which has carried out the most detailed examination of the war, was less forgiving than Israelâs own investigators -- as might have been expected in the case of such a flagrant abuse of the rules of war. Still, it has failed to condemn Israelâs actions unreservedly. In a typical press release it noted the wide dispersal of cluster bombs over civilian areas of south Lebanon but concluded only that their use by Israel âmay violate the prohibition on indiscriminate attacks contained in international humanitarian lawâ. In this and other respects, HRWâs reports have revealed troubling double standards. During the war two charges were levelled against Hizbullah, mainly by Israelâs supporters, and investigated by the human rights group: that the Shia militia fired rockets on northern Israel either indiscriminately or in a deliberate attempt to target civilians; and that it hid its fighters and weapons among its own Lebanese civilians (thereby conveniently justifying Israelâs bombing of those civilians). Hizbullah was found guilty of the first charge, with HRW arguing that it was irrelevant whether or not Hizbullah was trying to hit military targets in Israel as its rockets were not precision-guided. All its rockets, whatever they were aimed at, were therefore considered indiscriminate by the organisation and a violation of international law. Worthy of note is that HRW expressed certainty about the impermissibility of Hizbullah firing imprecise rockets but not about Israelâs use of even less precise cluster bombs. On the second charge Hizbullah was substantially acquitted, with HRW failing to find evidence that, apart from in a handful of isolated instances, the militia hid among the Lebanese population. Regarding Israel, the human rights organisations investigated the charge that it violated international law by endangering Lebanese civilians during its bombing campaigns. Given that Israelâs missiles and bombs were supposed to have pinpoint accuracy, the large death toll of Lebanese civilians provided indisputable evidence of Israeli war crimes. HRW agreed. Strangely, however, after submitting both Israel and Hizbullah to the same test of whether their firepower targeted civilians, HRW deemed it inappropriate to investigate Israel on the second allegation faced by Hizbullah: that it committed a war crime by blending in with its own civilian population. Was there so little prima facie evidence of such behaviour on Israelâs side that the organisation decided it was not worth wasting its resources on such an inquiry?
part 2............. HRW produced two lengthy reports in August 2007, one examining events in Lebanon and the other events in Israel. But the report on what happened inside Israel, âCivilians under Assaultâ, failed to examine Israelâs treatment of its own civilians and focused instead only on proving that Hizbullahâs firing of its rockets violated international law. HRW did made a brief reference to the possibility that Israeli military installations were located close to or inside civilian communities. It cited examples of a naval training base next to a hospital in Haifa and a weapons factory built in a civilian community. Its researchers even admitted to watching the Israeli army firing shells into Lebanon from a residential street of the Jewish community of Zarit. This act of âcowardly blendingâ by the Israeli army -- to echo the UN envoy Jan Egelandâs unwarranted criticism of Hizbullah -- was a war crime. It made Israeli civilians a potential target for Hizbullah reprisal attacks. So what was HRWâs position on this gross violation of the rules of war it had witnessed? After yet again denouncing Hizbullah for its rocket attacks, the report was mealy-mouthed: âGiven that indiscriminate fire [by Hizbullah], there is no reason to believe that Israelâs placement of certain military assets within these cities added appreciably to the risk facing their residents.â In other words, Israelâs culpability in hiding its war machine inside civilian communities did not need to be assessed on its own terms as a violation of international law. Instead Israel was let off the hook based on the assumption that Hizbullahâs rockets were incapable of hitting such positions. It is dubious, to put it mildly, whether this is a legitimate reading of international law. An additional criticism, one that I made on several occasions during the war, was that Israel failed to protect its Arab communities from rocket attacks by ensuring they had bomb shelters or early warning systems -- unlike Jewish communities. On this issue, the HRW report had only this to say: âHuman Rights Watch did not investigate whether Israel discriminated among Jewish and Arab residents of the north in the protection it provided from Hezbollah attacks.â Of Hizbullahâs indiscrimination, HRW was certain; of Israelâs discrimination, it held back from judgment. Fortunately, we no longer have to rely on Human Rights Watch or Amnesty International for a full picture of what took place during what Israelis call the Second Lebanon War. Last month the Arab Association for Human Rights, based in Nazareth, published its own report, âCivilians in Dangerâ, covering the ground its much bigger cousins dared not touch. The hostile climate in Israel towards the fifth of the population who are Arab has made publication of the report a risky business. Azmi Bishara, Israelâs leading Arab politician and a major critic of Israelâs behaviour during the Lebanon war, is currently in exile under possible death sentence. Israel has accused him of treason in helping Hizbullah during the fighting, though the secret services have yet to produce the evidence they have supposedly amassed against him. Nonetheless they have successfully intimidated most of the Arab minority into silence. Also, much of the reportâs detail, including many place-names and maps showing the location of Hizbullah rocket strikes, has had to be excised to satisfy Israelâs strict military censorship laws. But despite these obstacles, the Human Rights Association has taken a brave stand in unearthing the evidence to show that Israel committed war crimes by placing much of its military hardware, including artillery positions firing into Lebanon, inside and next to Arab towns and villages. These were not isolated instances but a discerible pattern. The threat to which this exposed Arab communities was far from as theoretical as HRW supposes. Some 660 Hizbullah rockets landed on 20 Arab communities in the north, apparently surprising Israeli officials, who believed Hizbullah would not target fellow Arabs. Of the 44 Israeli civilians killed by the rockets, 21 were Arab citizens. Israel has cited these deaths as further proof that Hizbullahâs rocket fire was indiscriminate. The Human Rights Association, however, reaches a rather different conclusion, one based on the available evidence. Its research shows a clear correlation between an Arab community having an Israeli army base located next to it and the likelihood of it being hit by Hizbullah rockets. In short, Arab communities targeted by Hizbullah were almost exclusively those in which the Israeli army was based. âThe study found that the Arab towns and villages that suffered the most intensive attacks during the war were ones that were surrounded by military installations, either on a permanent basis or temporarily during the course of the war,â the report states. Such findings lend credibility to complaints made during the war by Israelâs Arab legislators, including Bishara himself, that Arab communities were being used as âhuman shieldsâ by the Israeli army -- possibly to deter Hizbullah from targeting its positions. In early August 2006, Bishara told the Maariv newspaper: âWhat ordinary citizens are afraid to say, the Arab Knesset members are declaring loudly. Israel turned the Galilee and the Arab villages in particular into human shields by surrounding them with artillery positions and missile batteries.â Such violations of the rules of war were occasionally hinted at in reporting in the Israeli media. In one account from the front line, for example, a reporter from Maariv quoted parents in the Arab village of Fassuta complaining that children were wetting their beds because of the frightening bark of tanks stationed outside their homes.
part 3...final part According to the Human Rights Associationâs report, Israel made its Arab citizens vulnerable to Hizbullahâs rockets in the following ways: * Permanent military bases, including army camps, airfields and weapons factories, as well as temporary artillery positions that fired thousands of shells and mortars into southern Lebanon were located inside or next to many Arab communities. * The Israeli army trained soldiers inside northern Arab communities before and during the war in preparation for a ground invasion, arguing that the topography in these communities was similar to the villages of south Lebanon. * The government failed to evacuate civilians from the area of fighting, leaving Arab citizens particularly in danger. Almost no protective measures, such as building public shelters or installing air raid sirens, had been taken in Arab communities, whereas they had been in Jewish communities. Under the protocols to the Geneva Conventions, parties to a conflict must âavoid locating military objectives within or near densely populated areasâ and must âendeavour to remove the civilian population ⦠from the vicinity of military objectivesâ. The Human Rights Association report clearly shows that Israel cynically broke these rules of war. Tarek Ibrahim, a lawyer and the author of the Associationâs report, says the most surprising finding is that Hizbullahâs rockets mostly targeted Arab communities where military installations had been located and in the main avoided those where there were no such military positions. âHizbullah claimed on several occasions that its rockets were aimed primarily at military targets in Israel. Our research cannot prove that to be the case but it does give a strong indication that Hizbullahâs claims may be true.â Although Hizbullahâs Katyusha rockets were not precision-guided, the proximity of Israeli military positions to Arab communities âare within the margin of error of the rockets fired by Hizbullahâ, according to the report. In most cases, such positions were located either inside the community itself or a few hundred metres from it. In its recommendations, the Human Rights Association calls for the removal of all Israeli military installations from civilian communities. (Again noteworthy is the fact that Israel has built several weapons factories inside Arab communities, including in Nazareth. Arab citizens are almost never allowed to work in Israelâs vast military industries, so why build them there? Part of the reason is doubtless that they provide another pretext for confiscating Arab communitiesâ lands and âJudaisingâ them. But is the criticism by Arab legislators of âhuman shieldingâ another possible reason?) The report avoids dealing with the wider issue of whether the Israeli army located in Jewish communities too during the war. Ibrahim explains: âIn part the reason was that we are an Arab organisation and that directs the focus of our work. But there is also the difficulty that Israeli Jews are unlikely to cooperate with our research.â Israel has longed boasted of its âcitizen armyâ, and in surveys Israeli Jews say they trust the military more than the countryâs parliament, government and courts. Nonetheless, the report notes, there is ample evidence that the army based itself in some Jewish communities too. As well as the eyewitness account of the Human Rights Watch researcher, it was widely reported during the war that 12 soldiers were killed when a Hizbullah rocket struck the rural community of Kfar Giladi, close to the northern border. A member of the kibbutz, Uri Eshkoli, recently told the Israeli media: âWe deserve a medal of honor for our assistance during the war. We opened our hotel to soldiers and asked for no compensation. Moreover, soldiers stayed in the kibbutz throughout the entire war.â In another report, in the Guardian newspaper, a 19-year-old British Jew, Danny Young, recounted his experiences performing military service during the war. He lived on Kibbutz Sasa, close to the border, which became an army rear base. âWe were shooting missiles from the foot of this kibbutz,â he told the paper. âWe were also receiving Katyushas.â So far the Human Rights Associationâs report has received minimal coverage in the Hebrew media. âWe are facing a very difficult political atmosphere in Israel at the moment,â Ibrahim told me. âFew people inside Israel want to hear that their army and government broke international law in such a flagrant manner.â It seems few in the West, even the guardians of human rights, are ready to hear such a message either. Jonathan Cook is a journalist and writer based in Nazareth, Israel. His latest book, âIsrael and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle Eastâ, is published by Pluto Press. His website is www.jkcook.net
Jerusalem Viewpoints THE DEBATE ABOUT GETTING OUT OF GAZA Max Singer The current focus in Israeli discussion on whether some Jews have to leave their homes makes consideration of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's Gaza disengagement plan unnecessarily and harmfully divisive and misses the real issue of whether the current proposal improves or worsens Israeli security now and for the future. * The widespread agreement among Israelis that ultimately Gaza should not be part of Israel is virtually irrelevant to the question of whether Gaza disengagement is good for Israel now. Opposition to the proposal is not based on a concern for keeping Gaza. * Gaza disengagement needs to be evaluated on the assumption that it will result immediately or shortly in the loss of Israel's ability to control Gaza's borders with the world. It is unlikely that even the Israeli leadership believes that Israel can control these borders if it "gets out of Gaza" as he proposes. * Because the military benefit to the Palestinians of being able to import advanced weaponry, foreign political activists, and foreign military into Gaza will probably increase the military burden on Israel, the virtue of Gaza disengagement must be in its political benefits. * These political benefits have to be greater than the political cost of giving a victory to terrorism and encouraging Muslim and other supporters of the Palestinians. The prime minister and his advisers have not articulated a vision of how the disengagement will improve Israel's relationship with the Palestinians or how Israel's general political position would be improved by the disengagement (apart from President Bush's letter); it is only said that Israel can't keep everything and must do something now. * However, if the U.S. war against terrorism improves the political environment in the Middle East, Israel might be better off "disengaging" later rather than now. Furthermore, postponing disengagement might enable Israel to strengthen those in the U.S. who favor a realistic policy toward the Palestinians rather than giving support to the State Department approach. * Unless the Israeli public hears how valid security concerns are going to be addressed, the popular notion of getting out of Gaza could face rising opposition. The State of Israel is strong and the State of Israel is in danger. Only the U.S. and a few others care about preventing Israel's destruction. Therefore, Israel must follow a policy that best enhances its chances of survival. Since Israel is ready to sacrifice lives for its defense, it should also be ready to sacrifice homes if that would be useful. It is clear that if several thousand families could make a serious contribution to Israel's safety by moving to new homes, most Israelis would say they have an obligation to do so - with appropriate compensation. Indeed, if these families believed they could improve Israel's security by moving, most would do so voluntarily. So the key question about Prime Minister Sharon's plan to unilaterally separate from Gaza is not whether Jews should be forced to give up their homes - with or without some concessions by the Palestinians. It is a question of whether Israel's security would be improved or harmed by getting out of Gaza now. What are the possible dangers and opportunities for Israel that the Gaza proposal may create? The false debate about homes is doubly harmful because it prevents people from thinking about the possible dangers and opportunities for Israel that the Gaza proposal may create, and at the same time it creates unnecessary divisions within Israel.