Israeli soldier faces a manslaughter charge for shooting two women waving white flags [Archive]

Eki

8th July 2010, 19:41

Not accepting shooting unarmed civilians carrying a white flag is apparently anti-Semitic:

The conclusion last year by the United Nations-appointed panel that Israel committed war crimes, targeted civilians and used disproportionate force sent shockwaves through Israel. The facts and findings were dismissed by the government as deeply flawed, and panel chairman Richard Goldstone, a Jewish jurist from South Africa, was reviled in Israel as a traitor and even anti-Semitic.

Yes, I've been called anti-Semitic myself a few times.

Easy Drifter

8th July 2010, 20:37

Why not wait and see the verdict and sentence before mouthing off?
That said I would think a murder charge more appropriate.

Mark in Oshawa

8th July 2010, 20:40

In Palestine Eki, People who shoot Jewish civilians are considered hero's. In Israel, they try those who commit atrocities.... which is a difference you continue to overlook in your rampant support of terrorist regimes around the world...

Shifter

9th July 2010, 02:19

The coming nuclear war will suck, but when it's over, thankfully the whole area will be left as a toxic wasteland uninhabitable by humans. Hopefully, because no one can live there, there will be nothing left of either side to fight about, and the human race will then be finally rid of this obnoxious distraction and move on to greater scientific enlightenment.

Jag_Warrior

9th July 2010, 03:10

Not accepting shooting unarmed civilians carrying a white flag is apparently anti-Semitic:

Yes, I've been called anti-Semitic myself a few times.

Of course you have been. So have I. If you're not pro-Zionism, then you are anti-Semitic! Makes perfect sense to me, you Jew hatin', Aryan Brotherhood, Hitler lover you!!! You send a fat check to the Jewish Defense League right now and we may consider giving you a pardon... MAYBE!

Me, I've promised to sell my P38, my SS dagger and all my other war memorabilia (American, German and Civil War... I'm keeping the Roman stuff!) and donate that money to Irv Rubin's defense fund. Plot to blow up ONE mosque and all of a sudden you're a bad guy?! Dang anti-Semites!!! They twist everything around to make Zionists look bad!

F1boat

9th July 2010, 08:34

Saint Devote

11th July 2010, 05:17

Actually we dont care who loves or hates us. Its not our problem.

My country is Israel. I have fought for it. As Jews we are aware what happens if we were to lose. There is no tougher people on this earth.

Nobody wants to die, but there is a price to pay in order to live and if that is the price then so be it.

You people just do not get us.

Anyone that takes us on will be destroyed and has been destroyed even though the price is high.

Look back in history and you will see that our enemies have been vanquished yet we are still here.

A pope asked one of his advisers what proof there is of G-d. He went a way and thought about it - then retured and answered: the Jews.

So rant and rave, be against or hate Israel, Jews or whatever - we do not care. We only care and fight that we may live and we will use any means available.

If Iran does succeed in detonating a nuclear weapon just remember that we are going to take the world with us because we will launch every single nuclear weapon we have to destroy the attacker.

The first PM of Israel, David Ben-Gurion said its was better to be hated as a Jewish warrior than loved as a Jewish victim - that still stands.

Of course most of the time when I challenge someone when they mouth anti-Jewish or Israeli slurs they are not safe behind a computer - they run away. Other times I have a favorite knuckle sandwich for them. They teach us well in the Israeli army, we are never afraid.

Upon completion of the Armoured division training a midnight ceremony is held each intake and the oath sweariing them in officially to the IDF is taken atop Masada.

The oath is "Never Again" - and we mean it.

race aficionado

11th July 2010, 05:24

See . . . there lies the problem . . . .

ShiftingGears

11th July 2010, 07:11

Why not wait and see the verdict and sentence before mouthing off?
That said I would think a murder charge more appropriate.

Absolutely.

Eki

11th July 2010, 12:16

If Iran does succeed in detonating a nuclear weapon just remember that we are going to take the world with us because we will launch every single nuclear weapon we have to destroy the attacker.

The first PM of Israel, David Ben-Gurion said its was better to be hated as a Jewish warrior than loved as a Jewish victim - that still stands.

That's exactly why Israel shouldn't have nuclear weapons no more than Iran should. If the Nazis have had nuclear weapons in 1945, they've probably taken at least Germany with them if not the world before surrendering. Now Hitler just took his own life.

People full of hatred and fear shouldn't be allowed to have nuclear weapons.

I bet the Palestinians also think it's better to be hated as a Palestinian warrior than loved as a Palestinian victim.

Jag_Warrior

12th July 2010, 04:49

See . . . there lies the problem . . . .

Yup.

I'm a BIG 2nd Amendment guy. But I'm also very much against people with mental issues owning or possessing firearms. I use the same logic with respect to countries and nukes. ;)

Rani

12th July 2010, 16:22

Why not wait and see the verdict and sentence before mouthing off?
That said I would think a murder charge more appropriate.
I'm not that knowledgeable on this particular incident, but if he did shoot them in cold blood I agree he should be faced with a murder charge. Whatever the outcome, I'm sure it will only hurt him in the future. Sitting in jail, he will probably be seen as a killer all his life. Those who know him will probably point and stare. On the other hand, Palestinians who murder Israeli citizens by the dozen get squares and streets named after them. http://palestinenote.com/cs/blogs/news/archive/2010/03/13/dalal-mughrabi-square-palestinians-remember-controversial-figure.aspx

Eki

12th July 2010, 16:42

I'm not that knowledgeable on this particular incident, but if he did shoot them in cold blood I agree he should be faced with a murder charge. Whatever the outcome, I'm sure it will only hurt him in the future. Sitting in jail, he will probably be seen as a killer all his life. Those who know him will probably point and stare. On the other hand, Palestinians who murder Israeli citizens by the dozen get squares and streets named after them. http://palestinenote.com/cs/blogs/news/archive/2010/03/13/dalal-mughrabi-square-palestinians-remember-controversial-figure.aspx
So? An Israeli who was in charge of killing Palestinians while robbing their land got an airport and a university named after him:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ben-Gurion

Ben-Gurion recognized the strong attachment of Palestinian Arabs to the land but hoped that this would be overcome in time. Nahum Goldmann, president of the World Jewish Congress, wrote that in a conversation about "the Arab problem" in 1956, Ben-Gurion stated: "Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country ... There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that? They may perhaps forget in one or two generations' time, but for the moment there is no chance. So it is simple: we have to stay strong and maintain a powerful army."[2] Goldman criticized Ben-Gurion for what he viewed as Ben-Gurion's confrontational approach to the Arab world. Goldman wrote that "Ben-Gurion is the man principally responsible for the anti-Arab policy, because it was he who moulded the thinking of generations of Israelis."[2]
The view that Ben-Gurion's assessment of Arab feelings led him to emphasize the need to build up Jewish military strength is supported by Simha Flapan, who quoted Ben-Gurion as stating in 1938: "I believe in our power, in our power which will grow, and if it will grow agreement will come..."[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Gurion_International_Airport
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben-Gurion_University_of_the_Negev

Rani

12th July 2010, 16:50

So? An Israeli who was in charge of killing Palestinians while robbing their land got an airport and a university named after him:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ben-Gurion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Gurion_International_Airport
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben-Gurion_University_of_the_Negev
By your standards Dalal Mughrabi should be compared to all great leaders from Alexander the Great to Sir Winston Churchill.
Ok.

Mark in Oshawa

12th July 2010, 19:48

That's exactly why Israel shouldn't have nuclear weapons no more than Iran should. If the Nazis have had nuclear weapons in 1945, they've probably taken at least Germany with them if not the world before surrendering. Now Hitler just took his own life.

People full of hatred and fear shouldn't be allowed to have nuclear weapons.

I bet the Palestinians also think it's better to be hated as a Palestinian warrior than loved as a Palestinian victim.

so why are you so silent on Iran getting Nukes? Why are you so silent about Pakistan having nukes?

Eki, you are inconsistent at best.....

Eki

12th July 2010, 21:25

so why are you so silent on Iran getting Nukes? Why are you so silent about Pakistan having nukes?

Eki, you are inconsistent at best.....
As far as I know, Iran doesn't have nukes. And Pakistan hasn't threatened to take the world with them.

Besides, there are enough people preaching about Iran not having the right to nuclear power and putting sanctions on them without me. But few try to do something about Israel having nukes or putting sanctions on Israel. IMO, that's inconsistent at best too.

Eki

12th July 2010, 21:32

By your standards Dalal Mughrabi should be compared to all great leaders from Alexander the Great to Sir Winston Churchill.
Ok.
I was talking about David Ben-Gurion, not Dalal Mughrabi. Maybe you should also add Adolf Hitler there too. He achieved a lot as a leader too. We're obviously not discussing if the achievements of those leaders were good or bad, just that they were great.

BTW, where is an airport or a university named after Churchill and Alexander the Great?

Easy Drifter

12th July 2010, 22:29

There is a Winston Churchill Collegiate in Toronto.
Several other schools in Canada named after Churchill.

Rani

12th July 2010, 23:01

Alexander the Great had a whole city named after him. It's a city in Egypt called Alexandria. Which is in Arabia. Which is not a language, but a geographical location.

A quick search found this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churchill_College,_Cambridge

As I admit it was a quick search by me, I expect Eki to research the matter and check whether this college is named after Ward Churchill.

Eki

12th July 2010, 23:03

There is a Winston Churchill Collegiate in Toronto.
Several other schools in Canada named after Churchill.
Well, at least Churchill didn't invade Germany and Finland in order to resettle them with Englishmen. However, he did declare a war against Finland, when even the Americans didn't.

Rani

13th July 2010, 00:29

Ifyou lie down with Nazi dogs, you will get up with British fleas I guess...

Easy Drifter

13th July 2010, 01:59

And we have fallen for wiki Eki going off at a tangent again.

Eki

13th July 2010, 07:18

Ifyou lie down with Nazi dogs, you will get up with British fleas I guess...
You have a point. With the Bolshevik dogs of the Soviet Union we would have gotten the dogs and all. Much better deal.

donKey jote

13th July 2010, 12:19

I'm not that knowledgeable on this particular incident, but if he did shoot them in cold blood I agree he should be faced with a murder charge.
Rani for what it´s worth (not much I know :) ), you have my respect :up:

The standard lines during Cast Lead was more along the tired "they deserve it for voting Hamas" "**** happens in a war zone" "serves them right for living in Gaza" "we are always extremely careful to avoid collateral damage" etc

chuck34

13th July 2010, 13:42

And Pakistan hasn't threatened to take the world with them.

Israel has not threatened to take the world either. They are purely defensive, a threat to her neighbors not to do anything too stupid. All the evidence you need that Israel only has defensive means in mind with respect to their nukes is history. How many wars have they been in, and how many times have they used nukes?

Even someone as inconsistent, and hypocritical as you can see the lack of logic in your arguments on this subject.

Eki

13th July 2010, 14:11

Israel has not threatened to take the world either.

Saint Devote just did one page ago:

If Iran does succeed in detonating a nuclear weapon just remember that we are going to take the world with us because we will launch every single nuclear weapon we have to destroy the attacker.

And I remember some Israeli professor threatened Europe with Israel's nuclear weapons recently:

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/israeli-professor-we-could-destroy-all-european-capitals-0

Taking out Iran doesn't require taking out the whole world or even Europe. "Defensive weapon", my ass.

ShiftingGears

13th July 2010, 14:18

Eki

13th July 2010, 14:29

That is two people, without any power whatsoever. Troll.
How many people in Iran with real power has threatened the world with nuclear weapons? None. How many many people in Iran with real power has threatened Israel? None.

chuck34

13th July 2010, 15:18

Saint Devote just did one page ago:

If Iran does succeed in detonating a nuclear weapon

Let's see, now Eki has demonstrated his lack of reading comprehension, understanding of plain English, and the nature of cause and effect and how that relates to the word DEFENSIVE.

And I remember some Israeli professor threatened Europe with Israel's nuclear weapons recently:

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/israeli-professor-we-could-destroy-all-european-capitals-0

Taking out Iran doesn't require taking out the whole world or even Europe. "Defensive weapon", my ass.

Yep, I'm scared about what some professor who has no power says. And again you like to quote things out of context. He was talking about Isreal's ability to attack European countries IF NEEDED ie, if they were to line up against them. And are you really going to quote from a sources that uses Nostradamis as a fact?

chuck34

13th July 2010, 15:21

How many people in Iran with real power has threatened the world with nuclear weapons? None. How many many people in Iran with real power has threatened Israel? None.

Don't give me this crap about Ahmadinejad not having any "real" power. If he said something against the Supreme Leader, he'd be smacked down so quick his head wouldn't have time to spin. The fact that he's said these things more than once shows that he's not too far from the truth.

Eki

13th July 2010, 16:27

Don't give me this crap about Ahmadinejad not having any "real" power. If he said something against the Supreme Leader, he'd be smacked down so quick his head wouldn't have time to spin. The fact that he's said these things more than once shows that he's not too far from the truth.
The truth is, even Ahmadinejad has not said anything about nuclear weapons, except that Iran is not trying to build them claiming the Iranian nuclear program is for civilian nuclear power alone. Ahmadinejad may have said something about wiping Israel off the map, but it doesn't necessarily take nuclear or any other weapons. For example, the Soviet Union and DDR were wiped off the map rather peacefully. Decades of sanctions brought the Apartheid government in South Africa. Decades of sanctions against Israel might bring down the Zionist government in Israel.

Rani

13th July 2010, 17:18

Saint Devote just did one page ago:

And I remember some Israeli professor threatened Europe with Israel's nuclear weapons recently:

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/israeli-professor-we-could-destroy-all-european-capitals-0

Taking out Iran doesn't require taking out the whole world or even Europe. "Defensive weapon", my ass.
Contrary to some people's beliefs, Israelis don't want to go to war. We all have mothers who hate it bad enough that we have to fight the occasional war against our neighbours. It's not that fun for us, either.
Israel starting a war against a european country is about as far fetched as I can imagine. Look through history and you'll find Israel never started a war without being provoked to. I don't think you europeans have anything to fear us israelis. I would worry about fundamentalist islam a lot more. They don't like us infidels. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/asia_pacific/10145737.stm

Remember two years ago I warned you they were coming to europe and you suggested the northern countries have nothing to worry about?
Wake up and smell the homemade bombs.

Rani

13th July 2010, 17:34

Rani for what it´s worth (not much I know :) ), you have my respect :up:

The standard lines during Cast Lead was more along the tired "they deserve it for voting Hamas" "**** happens in a war zone" "serves them right for living in Gaza" "we are always extremely careful to avoid collateral damage" etc
You have to distinguish between collateral damage and loss of civilian life which are never totally preventable yet unintentional to flat out murder. I would never defend killing of innocent civilians. No normal person would.
http://www.news24.com/Africa/News/Somali-militants-praise-Uganda-attacks-20100712

In Mogadishu, Somalia, Sheik Yusuf Sheik Issa, an al-Shabaab commander, told The Associated Press early on Monday that he was happy with the attacks in Uganda but refused to confirm or deny that al-Shabaab was responsible.

"Uganda is one of our enemies. Whatever makes them cry, makes us happy. May Allah's anger be upon those who are against us," Sheik said.

This quote is concerning an attack which killed over 60 people in Uganda. I wouldn't be happy if I heard 60 innocent civilians were killed in Lebanon, Iran, Syria or anywhere else.

Bob Riebe

13th July 2010, 17:42

Innocent adult civilians, do not exist.

Main Entry: in·no·cent

1 a : free from guilt or sin especially through lack of knowledge of evil

ShiftingGears

13th July 2010, 17:52

How many people in Iran with real power has threatened the world with nuclear weapons? None. How many many people in Iran with real power has threatened Israel? None.

Two Israelis with no power threatening to use nuclear weapons does not equate to ISRAEL threatening to take out the world.

Two Iranians with no power threatening to use nuclear weapons does not equate to IRAN threatening to take out the world.

Admit it. You are wrong.

ShiftingGears

13th July 2010, 17:52

Innocent adult civilians, do not exist.

Main Entry: in·no·cent

1 a : free from guilt or sin especially through lack of knowledge of evil

Masters in Philosophy right there..

Eki

13th July 2010, 18:43

Remember two years ago I warned you they were coming to europe and you suggested the northern countries have nothing to worry about?
Wake up and smell the homemade bombs.
Sniff..no...sniff...nothing

Although, things have changed. Swedes and Finns have been in some firefights with some Afghans and the Afghans have threaten the Swedes to revenge the Afghans who died in those fights. Also families of some Swedish soldiers in Afghanistan have received threats. So the chances of a Muslim terrorist attack in the Nordic countries have gone up from nearly impossible to remotely possible.

Eki

13th July 2010, 19:05

The link said the men in Norway were plotting against the US and Britain, not the Nordic countries. Not much new then to worry about, unless the US and Britain invade us for harboring terrorists.

Rani

13th July 2010, 20:29

The link said the men in Norway were plotting against the US and Britain, not the Nordic countries. Not much new then to worry about, unless the US and Britain invade us for harboring terrorists.
I'll go along with that. They could use the fact your security is weak (since your so confident you won't be targetted) to attack US or British embassies. Do you think they'd mind if five local passersby were to be killed by a car bomb they parked in front of an embassy?

I know they wouldn't care one bit. How could you expect someone who would strap his own children to bombs to value a stranger's life?

Eki

13th July 2010, 20:54

I know they wouldn't care one bit. How could you expect someone who would strap his own children to bombs to value a stranger's life?
Neither do those care who strap other people's children into fighter jets, bombers and tanks and send them off to war to kill other people's children.

ShiftingGears

14th July 2010, 03:26

Two Israelis with no power threatening to use nuclear weapons does not equate to ISRAEL threatening to take out the world.

Two Iranians with no power threatening to use nuclear weapons does not equate to IRAN threatening to take out the world.

Admit it. You are wrong.

I'm waiting.

markabilly

14th July 2010, 05:42

???

Mark...err Eki has forgotten to take his meds again....all this dribble but a lover of the Queen, tells me that Eki must be mark having a schzoid episode

Easy Drifter

14th July 2010, 06:03

Even for Eki, equating terrorists turning immature children into suicide bombers against mainly innocent civilians to adult members of a properly constituted uniformed legal military force is a huge stretch.
But then Eki and fellow anti semetics can see no evil in terrorism against a legally constituted state that he doesn't agree with.
Further, as always, when Eki realizes he has lost any creditbility discussing the original thread goes off on a totally different tangent, where he hopes he will not look like such a fool.

Hondo

14th July 2010, 12:35

Neither do those care who strap other people's children into fighter jets, bombers and tanks and send them off to war to kill other people's children.

I can't speak for other countries but US servicemen and women are all volunteers, at or past the legal age of consent. They elected to become warriors in their country's name knowing full well they could be sent into battle. The leaders above them "who strap them into fighter jets, etc." do care about them very much. One doesn't need to look much further beyond the medical care, logistical support, and expensive technology provided to the US warriors to understand that. Combine the material support with tactics designed to present the least possible risk to personnel, and I'd have to say they care.

I have never heard of your buddy George Bush strapping explosives to a man, woman, or child and telling them to wander amongst that crowd of people other there and blow themselves and the other people into pieces to give Allah an orgasm.

Eki

14th July 2010, 13:44

I
I have never heard of your buddy George Bush strapping explosives to a man, woman, or child and telling them to wander amongst that crowd of people other there and blow themselves and the other people into pieces to give Allah an orgasm.
BTW, how many US servicemen have died this far in Iraq and Afghanistan? In vain, I might say.

Easy Drifter

14th July 2010, 15:09

The death of servicemen and women in Iraq and Afghanistan does not equate to children terrorists deliberately committing suicide and killing innocent people.
I am sure the families of Finnish soldiers killed in Afghanistan really appreciate your condemnation of their family members.
I sure don't and we Canadians have had far too many killed and maimed as have the Dutch, Brits and US trying to give people freedom from the terrorists you support.
The deaths of allied soldiers being called in vain is just your opinion.
You are straying even further off the thread as you make more and more idiotic comments, in my opinion.

Eki

14th July 2010, 17:02

I am sure the families of Finnish soldiers killed in Afghanistan really appreciate your condemnation of their family members.

At least they were soldiers who volunteered to go Afghanistan, and not just civilians who volunteered to be soldiers without any saying where they'd be sent.

Easy Drifter

14th July 2010, 18:25

Eki

14th July 2010, 18:39

You join the military (any) you normally do not have any say in your assignment and anyone who joins thinking they would is a few bricks shy of a load.
You are sounding more and more foolish, in my opinion.
The Finnish military is only obliged to defend their own country, not to fight or serve in foreign countries. The Finnish military or the government couldn't send anyone to Afghanistan against their will, at least not without changing the law or declaring a war against Afghanistan.

Hondo

14th July 2010, 18:56

BTW, how many US servicemen have died this far in Iraq and Afghanistan? In vain, I might say.

I don't know. I don't keep track of the numbers. In vain? I don't know how to judge that. To be sure, the world and his former neighbors don't seem to be shedding any tears over Saddam not walking the earth anymore. It's hard to gauge what the end of his rule has prevented with the exception of the "liberation" of his people, whom, in my opinion were not and are not worth the effort. They deserve what ever government they will roll over for. The Afghanistan operations did and continue to keep Al-Q backing up and selecting weaker targets. In the case of Afghanistan, a country like the US is only going to tolerate so much nonsense before, win or lose, it has to take some form of action to make it clear we're pissed.

Eki

14th July 2010, 19:12

The Afghanistan operations did and continue to keep Al-Q backing up and selecting weaker targets.
Maybe, but because of the war, more are trying. Is several weaker targets better than one stronger target? Maybe, maybe not.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us+canada-10634960

Video of Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad surfaces

A video has emerged in which the man who attempted to set off a car bomb in New York defends his actions.

Faisal Shahzad says in the tape he is carrying out the Times Square attack for Muslim fighters, "oppressed and weak Muslims", and "martyrs".

The Pakistani-born US citizen admitted all charges relating to the attempted attack on 1 May.

A petrol and propane bomb was left in a car but failed to ignite. Shahzad is due to be sentenced in October.

A street vendor saw smoke coming from the vehicle and alerted the police.

Shahzad was arrested two days later as he tried to take a flight to Dubai from New York's John F Kennedy airport.

In the video, broadcast on the al-Arabiya TV station, Shahzad refers to Taliban leader Baytullah Mehsud and al-Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musaab al-Zarqawi - both of whom were killed by US forces.

"This attack on the United States will be an attack for all the mujahideen, the oppressed and weak Muslims, the martyrs such as Baytullah Mehsud and Abu Musaab al-Zarqawi and all those Muslims and Arabs who have been martyred," he says.

"I carry out this for them and I hope that they are pleased with it."

He added: "Eight years have passed since the Afghanistan war (began) and you shall see how the Muslim war has just begun, and how Islam will spread across the world."

'Muslim soldier'

In a court appearance in Manhattan last month, Shahzad said he wanted to let the US know that if it did not get out of Iraq and Afghanistan and stop drone attacks and meddling in Muslim lands, "we will be attacking US".

Shahzad, 30, told the court: "One has to understand where I'm coming from. I consider myself... a Muslim soldier."

Shifter

16th July 2010, 19:35

Mark in Oshawa

17th July 2010, 02:54

America's foreign policy has won it few friends; I fail to see how a bunch of spineless 'attacks' by muslims is going to help 'spread islam across the land'. I for one have gone from tolerant of islam back in the late '90s to rather sick of it and angry with it today. The followers of Islam have failed to either spread enough goodwill nor to have come anywhere close to converting, or having the capability of corverting people in the civilized world by 'sword'.

They want the war Shifter...that is the dirty little secret. Unfortunately, if we don't give it to them, things will escalate anyhow. Might as well just do it with a set of principles and hope for the best. I don't see your current President really grasping all of this....I am not sure he grasps what he is dealing with really at all....