Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

There was no massacre in Jenin

A good (for the Israelis) description comes from Miriam-Webster:

Main Entry: 1mas·sa·cre
Pronunciation: 'ma-si-k&r
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French
Date: circa 1578
1 : the act or an instance of killing a number of usually helpless or unresisting human beings under circumstances of atrocity or cruelty
Click to expand...

By this definition, what happened in Jenin WAS NOT a massacre. They were not helpless or unresisting. They were well aware of what they were doing, and fought back killing 23 Israeli soldiers.

Another definition from dictionary.com is:

mas·sa·cre Pronunciation Key (ms-kr) n.
The act or an instance of killing a large number of humans indiscriminately and cruelly.
Click to expand...

The term "large number" is open to discussion. I might consider 250 to be a large number, while someone else might consider 250 to be a large number.

The key words however are indiscriminately and cruelly.

The battle was very heavy and 23 Israeli soldiers died, so, if most of the dead were killed in the thick of battle, can this be called 'indiscriminate'? I don't think so.

How about cruel? I don't think deaths in battle can be considered especially cruel. The terrorists knew what they were getting in for when they started their campaign.

Civilians being killed is extremely unpleasant (admit this is a major understatement), but the terrorists were well aware of the consequences of basing themselves in a populated area.
 
"but the terrorists were well aware of the consequences of basing themselves in a populated area."

And the Israeli forces were no doubt well aware of the consequences to the trapped civilian population indiscriminately killed by their tanks / gunships / shells / rockets / bulldozers / whatever!

We can argue about semantics until the cows come home, but to me it sure looks and smells like a massacre right now.
 
RE: "A good (for the Israelis) description comes from Miriam-Webster"

Another tactic, besides obvious lying, of these rightwing freaks is to play adolescent word games.
 
I've just seen an Israeli spokesman saying that Jenen had been heavily fortified and riddled with booby traps and this justified the use of force by the IDF.

So the desperate attempts by a towns inhabitants to stop a vast invading army justify the actions of the invading army in invading?

He described in some detail gunmen hiding in the ruins, booby trapped devices left in the street and fierce resitance.

Not at all like the Warsaw ghetto then.
 
its interesting that the IDF / pro-Israeli position on this seems to be the following:

i) there was no massacre

but

ii) we could have bombed flat Jenin anyway so you should be thankful that we didnt

and

iii) we only killed terrorists (a figure of between 20 and now 40...how soon until it gets closer to the PLO / international figure)....remember the "mass graves" plan

and

iv) anyone who didnt run off was a terrorist anyway

and of course....


v) they are palestinians and therefore dont count

btw anyone see the Israeli foreign minister talking about the capture of Baghouti? I think it was CNN, he said something like "Well we think he is a terrorist, of course he will have the opportunity to prove his innocence in an Israeli court...." is this the case in the justice system of israel?
 
Originally posted by the strategist
Losses outside of Jenin were insignificant.

You might as well save your breath. The pro Palestinian anti semites on these boards have no interest in truth, that would interfere with their hatred of Sharon and Israel. Given that so many of them are gutless cowards who would not even fight for their own countries survival, ( see other threads ) and support any people other than their own, they are truly scum. Chairman Mao had a wonderful phrase that describes them exactly, " Paper Tigers " which is exactly right as they are full of shit with no substance to back it up.
Click to expand...
 
"The pro Palestinian anti semites on these boards have no interest in truth"

TheGremlin, would you kindly point me in the direction of some anti-semitic postings so I can check them out for myself? It is after all a sweeping accusation and I presume you're not "full of shit with no substance to back it up" yourself ;)
 
The numbers killed

the IDF first said that there were hundreds killed, that then was wittled down to 35, now it is going up again. the IDF had to forced, legally, to explain waht it was doing with the bodies.

These are the reasons the world thinks there may have been a massacre.

whatever life loss there was, the fighting was great as was the physical destruction. why the hell would you want anyone else in there that might get harmed?
Click to expand...

the sort of people excluded were ones extremely well versed in operating in a war zone. and the deliberate blocking of humanitarian aid to civilians in war is a war crime (check the international criminal court for definitions). are you denying that this happened? are you going to say what a military lawyer said on newsnight last week that "Israel is trying to extend help wherever it can"? I ask again where the world-reknowned Israeli rescue teams are? the ones who assisted after the Turkish earthquake? israel has let many, many civilians die in what can only be described as a cruel way. whatever happened in jenin during the battle we already know about the denial of humanitarian aid. this is shameful and you are really losing your humanity if you cannot see this.

Well, when you consider that so many Israeli civilians have been affected by suicide bombers, and human nature being what it is, what response did you expect?
Click to expand...

well we've been through this in Britain. In the 70s and 80s the IRA killed many civilians in bombs. How did we react? we rounded up Irish people and put them in jail. twenty years later they were released because they were innocent. at the time 'action' was demanded and the Irish were fair game. we brought in jail without trial and carried out many operations and practises in Northern Ireland which broke international law. and there was a propoganda campaign which virtually barred any questioning of what was being done in our name.

So we do have some idea of what your reaction might be.

take two steps backward and a deep breath and LEARN from the experience of others. This military action will not defeat terrorism. It may buy you six months of relative peace as you trudge down to the supermarket but are you saying that it is worth tearing up obligations under international law to do so? never mind the suffering inflicted on so many innocents in your name?
 
We don't know if the Israeli Defence Force committed a massacre in Jenin (because the cunts wouldn't let journalists see what they were doing). But Israel has committed a separate warcrime - denying medical aid and food to the inhabitants of Jenin by preventing humatitarian aid organisations access to the city.

There you go. Israel. Warcrime.
 
UN Inquiry

I very much doubt that it will be anytime soon that we will get the sort of unanswerable, incontrovertible answer from a proper independent inquiry. how long did it take Israelis to force the Knesset to inquire about Shabra + Chatilla? and what happened as a result/ nothing to Sharon that I'm aware of despite the eventual inquiry's findings.

So I'm pretty depressed about 'the truth' getting out in such a way that Israelis will be forced to listen.

Having said that I think that the scale of destruction and law breaking is so vast this time, the trust shown towards Sharon so shallow, the condemnation by the rest of the world so strong and the past experience (especially with Lebanon) so resonant that I think the peace movement can only grow from this. well, it has to otherwise a hell of a lot more people will die.
 
Originally posted by the strategist
The whole cntral town was booby trapped
Click to expand...
And you have evidence of this, do you? Real evidence, not "someones friend has a brother who was in the IDF at the time" crap. I mean, if the whole of the centre of Jenin was booby trapped by the Palestinians then I would have thought that there would have been hard evidence that the Israelis would be showing to journalists right now, and for many days and weeks to come along the lines of "Those Palestinian barbarian dogs, look they even booby trapped the dead bodies of 12 year old children"

Apart from the IDF, everyone who has had access to Jenin has spoken about "morally repugnant" scenes, with radio journalists having difficulty describing what they saw and the red cross, PRCS, ICRC, UNHCR and other aid agencies saying that the IDF has acted in a disgusting manner. Even the US representative was upset by what he saw.

So, the strategist, either:
1: nothing out of the ordinary happened, and I'm going to have to apologise to you and the rest of the IDF supporters for thinking out of line here, or
2: the IDF have massacred lots of innocent Palestinians, prevented aid from reaching wounded civilians for over 12 days and they should be hauled before a war crimes commission.

I dont know what your strategy is, and who you are trying to convince, but I would start working on plan B soon if I were you.

Perhaps you can join forces with the rest of the Israeli apologists here to cook up some story along the lines of "Sharon is trying to encourage the regeneration of deprived Palestinian towns, and though he would save Arafat the trouble of having to hire a couple of bulldozers"

Peace, love and kisses,
Complex.
 
If the whole of central Jenin was boody-trapped, how come so few Israeli soldiers have died. Did they all have Lucky Charms for breakfast?
 
The whole cntral town was booby trapped
Click to expand...

This is a fact. It is pointless to argue with it.

If you really want to know, it takes 1 minute to set a booby trap, and up to 2 hours to defuse it (assuming you find it).

So, it was highly dangerous to let journalists, the UN, the Red Cross, etc. into such conditions.

Israel knows that if such people get hurt or killed, it will be criticised even more (it was damned if it let them in, damned if it didn't, so it chose the better alternative, not to let them in).
 
Journalists constantly go into dangerous areas and often get themselves killed or injured.

I remember Martin Bell getting stot by a sniper in TFJ. I don't remember anyone saying that he should have been kept out for his own protection.
 
The number of journalists killed in action is extremely high. I heard once that combat journalists have a higher chance of being killed than soldiers.

If such people get killed, Israel is always blamed. So, it decided to keep them out.
 
In which case it made the wrong decision.

I think we can draw our own conclusions as to why that decision was made.

<edited to add>I'd be grateful for a link to an instance of Israel being blamed for allowing Journalists to put themselves in danger.
 
"So, it was highly dangerous to let journalists, the UN, the Red Cross, etc. into such conditions. "

strategist, no offence, but this just doesn't wash, it will never wash.

The Red Cross/Crescent should have had access into Jenin, just as they do as a matter of routine in all other war zones where anti-personnel mines and other hazards get in their way. It's a dangerous job, but the people who do it know the risks.

Under the terms of the Geneva convention, Israel was obliged to allow these emergency services in. The IDF refused. Why?
 
Originally posted by the strategist


This is a fact. It is pointless to argue with it.

If you really want to know, it takes 1 minute to set a booby trap, and up to 2 hours to defuse it (assuming you find it).

So, it was highly dangerous to let journalists, the UN, the Red Cross, etc. into such conditions.

Israel knows that if such people get hurt or killed, it will be criticised even more (it was damned if it let them in, damned if it didn't, so it chose the better alternative, not to let them in).
Click to expand...

Stategist

What the fuck do you put in your sugar puffs? I'm struggling to believe that you are a real person. Is this a fucking wind-up???
 
Re. journalists

I found this BBC news article which highlights the main dangers faced by journos - and it seems it's not booby trapped houses they have to worry about the most!
Journalists "have repeatedly been targeted, shot, beaten, arrested, threatened and intimidated by Israelis (both soldiers and settlers) and by Palestinians (police and civilians)," the IPI report says.

....

"There were two deaths, 43 journalists were shot and 42 were harassed and physically assaulted in other ways.

"Eighty-seven per cent of all violations were perpetrated by Israelis... The overwhelming majority of victimised journalists are of Palestinian origin [mainly working for foreign media outlets].

...

"Responding to the RSF report, Israeli government chief press officer Daniel Seaman acknowledged the report was "not 'positive' from the perspective of Israel".
Click to expand...
(stuff bolded by me)

source (bbc news article aug 2001)
 
Strategist.

Ffs stop the crap. Your ramblings become more and more surreal each time you post. Wake up sonny and smell the fecking cappucino.

There have been allegations of atrocities committed by the IDF against Palestinian civilians from the UN, all manners of NGOs including the Red Cross and the Red Crescent, journalists and Palestinian eyewitnesses. Yet you dismiss these arguments as being nothing more than a campaign of anti semitism. Get real. These issues wont suddenly disappear because you refuse to see beyond your own tethered and quite frankly bigoted pov. So just you keep on banging your head against the wall Mr Strat because the only person you seem to be hurting is yourself.

God, I really do feel sorry for the politically blind.
 
The overwhelming majority of victimised journalists are of Palestinian origin
Click to expand...

Loki, you should have boldened this line as well.

These journalists are, in the Israel view, doing a great deal of interefence with army activities. Also, many of them are using the guise of journalist to take liberties.

An international journalist union recently comdemed both Israeli actions and Palestinian journalists for lack of objectivity in reporting. I can't remember which, but some journalist here might remember.
 
Originally posted by the strategist



These journalists are, in the Israel view, doing a great deal of interefence with army activities. Also, many of them are using the guise of journalist to take liberties.
Click to expand...

Taking liberties????

What are they trying to do?

You sound like a bit-part in a low-budget gangster movie. "Oh, Strategist, you're taking liberties. Ronnie and Reg don't like that..."
 
"These journalists are, in the Israel view, doing a great deal of interefence with army activities."

strategist, I really can't understand your mindset here!

"Also, many of them are using the guise of journalist to take liberties."

Evidence? References etc. appreciated
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

E
July 2005 London bomb blasts: UPDATES AND NEWS ONLY - NO DISCUSSION
66 67 68 69 70
Replies
2K
Views
123K
FridgeMagnet
FridgeMagnet
M
no to war on iraq demo 28.9.02
Replies
15
Views
2K
Abu Arak
A
S
No real threat to Israel? Think again!
Replies
29
Views
3K
PatelsCornerShop
P
N
NO "Not clean" war - BUT CLASS WAR
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
225
Views
15K
johnwisehammer
J
F
Western leaders are corrupt but at least they're not criminally insane like quite a f
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
TinyCrendon
T
Back
Top Bottom