Harry's Place

How utterly predictable, David – shoot the messager – T.

So you from your comfortable armchair in Hackney can pronounce that he is a lying about the situation in Gaza? And ergo that we can safely ignore his reports? Is that right? He is an unreliable narator and you are a reliable narrator?

From you, it is predictable, TheIrie.

I think that a man who remains a member of an extreme Left revolutionary party, that supported Pol Pot and denied his genocide, and who himself supports terrorism is not a credible source.

I think that if you’re ideologically committed to such a politics, pretty much nothing you say can be taken on trust.

Voter, this has gone on long enough and should be halted, but if there were a purely reasonable opposition to it, there would be no need for ‘embellishments’. Is Gilbert telling the truth or is he lying?

So yes to my four questions then?

“Dead civilians are the same whether they are Americans, Palestinians or Iraqis.”

Is this a controversial position?

Well done David T. Spread the word on this. Once again an example of naivety and lack of context from the media outlets.

He looks like Stumpy Pepys.

“So you from your comfortable armchair in Hackney can pronounce that he is a lying about the situation in Gaza?”

When he comes out with “We know among all the hundred we have seen so far, we have seen two fighters. “ I think it is fairly safe to say that he is a liar.

So yes to my four questions then?

Risible. Absolutely risible. Like JohnG telling us that he hasn’t read Eric Lee but has “heard of him”, i.e. been told what to think, your grasp of debate (here, at least) is somewhere between nil and almost nil.

I know! Let’s defer also to people in Sderot or Ashkelon. I meant, what right do we safely ensconced behind our computer screens know?

If the U.S. government has a legitimate right to bomb and kill civilians in Iraq, then there is also a moral right to attack the United States with the weapons they had to create. Dead civilians are the same whether they are Americans, Palestinians or Iraqis.

Are you suggesting that he, as a member of a far left party, supported the war on Iraq? If he didn’t- and I think thats 99% likely- then he did not think the U.S government had a legitimate right to bomb civilians in Iraq, and that statement could therefore easily fit with him being strongly against terrorist attacks. Indeed, that would seem more likely given he seems to dislike dead civilians all around.

Obviously I can’t know what his actual views are, but if thats the best quote you can find then nor do you and your claim in that regard is bunk.

So that leaves him being a member of an odd communist party. Well, I guess that might make him somewhat biased, but its hardly enough to assume that he is therefore making up casualty reports.

Do the fighters wear uniform? Can they be distinguished from civilians when they come into the hospital? If not, how can he make that statement?

Perhaps Tinter has forgotten that 9/11 came *before* Iraq.

Ah, yes, more fatuous ’shoot the messenger’ bollocks.

go and look at the pictures on the Guardian website of dead kids and stop this crass apologising or explaining away of Israeli war crimes.

You complain at the credentials of those reporting from Gaza, while it is the Israeli government who prevents mainstream media reporters like Jeremy Bowen from reporting from there.

You might hope that most people are thick enough to believe the lies and propaganda which the Israeli Government churn out, but the news for you is that not everyone is thick enough to believe that bullshit.

message in a teacup.

I didn’t express agreement with his analysis, Brett.

Its pretty clear he is stating that he finds the bombing in the Iraq war morally equivalent to terrorism.

I am sure you strongly disagree with this viewpoint. I also disagree with it. However, it is also clearly not support for terrorism. Indeed, in centres on terrorism being as awful as the attacks of what he sees as the imperialist superpower, which I am sure in his view it about as awful as it gets.

Its an equivalance you find objectionable, yes, but it is in no way *support* for terrorism.

“Do the fighters wear uniform?”

According to Channel 10 of Israel, the terrorists from Hamas have discarded uniforms and attack the troops wearing civilian clothes.

“go and look at the pictures on the Guardian website of dead kids and stop this crass apologising or explaining away of Israeli war crimes. ”

They should just stop launching rockets, don’t you think?
Since I was advised to prepare my refuge because my city is on the range of the Qassams and I have a daughter at home, I, like 99% of the Israelis, want Hamas DEAD and the problem solved once and for all.

Now, go look at your pornography, if you want.

Tinter – He said it a couple of weeks after 9/11 about GW1 not the current conflict in Iraq.

Yes, I read the date. Like I said, as a far-left party member I am sure he was strongly against that war. That he views attacking the US government as a priority even so soon after the attacks is dissapointing if unsuprising, and shows a typically wrong set of priorities by quite some way.

However, it is still clear he finds both acts objectionable. It poor judgement and an uncomfortable zeal for attacking the US at every turn, yes. But not support for terrorism.

“The Red party was previously the Workers Communist Party, which supported Pol Pot.”

So did the US and the UK, right the way through the 1980s. And I wonder which way Israel voted when it was proposed that the Khmer Rouge retained Kampuchea’s UN seat.

Tinter, I agree that his political affiliation doesn’t*necessarily* mean his comments here are false, but consider what would happen if Alan Walters were cited as an authority on the miner’s strike. Wouldn’t you suspect there was bias?

Next, look at what he said. He didn’t give the standard smug, oh-so-very smug guff about “understanding” terrorism. He said there was a “moral right” to attack and caused mayhem in America. He’s a thug.

Of course, it may be a mistranslation from the Norwegian.

Mike S, you are John Pilger, and I claim my five pounds!

Fair enough, I wasn’t sure you were clear. But he does himself say that he supports terrorist attacks within that context. As stated in the quote.

Last comment was of course to Tinter.

“You complain at the credentials of those reporting from Gaza, while it is the Israeli government who prevents mainstream media reporters like Jeremy Bowen from reporting from there”

Tee-hee. Yes. We need the Beeb to tell us the truth! You know, like we were told the truth about mass graves and hundreds of bodies hidden away in refrigerated lorries during the Jenin Genocide.

Funnily enough on the Beeb (mainstream media, i assume) an hour ago Aleem Maqbool told Azma Mir, that in the conflict so far 640 Gazans and just 4 Israelis had been killed. That struck me as odd.

I assume he is not counting Israeli soldiers (becuase at least 6 Israeli soldiers have died thus far). Fair enough, I guess. But perhaps then he oughta, you know, knock 400 odd off the dead Gazans figure? That would be fair reporting wouldn’t it? Or are we saying that no Hamas operatives have been killed thus far?

Oh…and on topic…..yes, this bloke is far from an impartial rational observer. Perhaps on the beeb we can have a member of some extreme right wing Israeli sect saying that only a dozen civilians have been killed in Gaza. Perhaps he can say this without the beeb or relevant media outlet giving any details of his background.

TheIriot, you really are a fXXcking parody now.

MattG

What do you know – a doctor with political opinions. Whatever next?

“What do you think the chances are of the BBC, The Times, CNN, the Independent, or any other major news organisations telling us about Dr Mads Gilbert’s extreme and vicious politics, next time he makes an appearance?”

What do you think the chances are of the BBC, The Times, CNN, the Independent, or any other major news organisations telling us about the anti-war demonstrations and activities within Israel, led by Israeli Jewish organisations, for example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mc9DN2Oi0-w&feature=channel

BTW if you don’t like the Norweigan medic and you want to get a second opinion on your broken heart about Israel or whatever your ailment is, you could try these doctors (Israeli Physicians for Human Rights)

http://www.phr.org.il/phr/article.asp?articleid=24&catid=51&pcat=51&lang=ENG

Of course is a ultra left wing norvegian doctor not a very realible source, and why do you think that Hamas is using him, because he looks like a neutral observer.
But of course there will be children and young people dead and wounded. Half the gaza population is under 15.
And thats the longterm problem.

No, the long term problem is that Hamas is conducting a war against Israel, from within the civilian population.

Hamas should stop attacking Israel. Permanent measures should be put in place to end Hamas’ re-armament. There will then be no Hamas positions to fire on.

Meh: “Fair enough, I wasn’t sure you were clear. But he does himself say that he supports terrorist attacks within that context. As stated in the quote.”

Yes, I apparently cannot read two paragraphs at once, classy stuff from myself. I withdraw all my previous comments on it.

That first paragraph doesn’t even make sense now. I mean, I can guess what his crazed analysis is, but it clearly doesn’t fit with the section I was quoting. It does make me wonder as to the translation, but it could also just be incoherent which would not be a suprise either. Its not like I don’t think people with such views exist.

Alec: I still take issue with rejecting all comments from him on this basis. Obviously he should not be taken as an authority, but the statements treated as authoratitive aren’t his anyway- they are the competing casualty quote from various organisations.

Its reasonable to interview him as a doctor on the ground in Gaza, as it is reasonable to interview an IDF spokesperson, regardless of eithers personal views.

David Rosenberg

“What do you think the chances are of the BBC, The Times, CNN, the Independent, or any other major news organisations telling us about the anti-war demonstrations and activities within Israel, led by Israeli Jewish organisations”

Are you mad? They do. Why on earth would you think they would cover this up?

I suspect the marches in Israel are somewhat secondary to the ongoing fighting and deaths though, hence not very dominant….but perhaps thats just me.

Maybe you are right though, maybe there is a media conspiracy of silence on opposition to the war in Israel (??)

For fXXks these comments threads are becoming increasingly ridiculous.

Where do these people come from?

MattG

Yes, Tinter, it’s undeniable that civilians have suffered and died, with – regardless of the culpability from Hamas – Israeli forces being the direct agents. However, I’m going out on a limb here, and suggesting that Gilbert is a fraud.

From the BBC website:

“Since the start of its military operation in Gaza, Israel has lost seven soldiers on the ground. Four people within Israel have been killed by rockets. ”

So Aleem Maqbool, when quoting this morining that there are 4 Israeli dead versus 640 Gazan dead is indeed ignoring Israeli military deaths whilst lumping every Palestinian death together.

Im fine with various cranks on this comments threads talking crap. But 2 or 3 million people would have heard his lies. And unlike Mads Gilbert he is a salaried, impartial, BBC reporter.

MattG

Khaled Meshal just now on Al Jazeera

“We need the continued support of the media, along with the aid agencies”.

Indeed.

MattG

“Its reasonable to interview him as a doctor on the ground in Gaza, as it is reasonable to interview an IDF spokesperson, regardless of eithers personal views.”

Yes, I agree.

I think it is important to appreciate quite how extreme his politics are: and the effect that this is likely to have on his perspective.

MattG: “I suspect the marches in Israel are somewhat secondary to the ongoing fighting and deaths though, hence not very dominant….but perhaps thats just me.”

As every good far lefty knows, commentary and protests about an event should recieve as much interest and coverage as the event itself. Anything less is clearly a conspiracy.

On the BBC casualty figure issue, in terms of reporting quality it is probably as you say. However, worrying about millions hearing his lies is pretty meaningless- changing the figure to 640 vs 10 doesn’t change the ratio or much at all and won’t change anyones views one way or another. It is bad reporting by the BBC, but not one that will result in minds moved.

Alec: I think we just have different expectations of the media. They will interview everyone and only bother to make sure they have similar numbers from each side. Thats their concept of fair and balanced. In that context hes no better or worse than anyone else.

I think they probably wouldn’t feature him, but they want to feature someone in Gaza and since they can’t send their own reporters in they get who Hamas gives. So long as Israel is preventing them from reporting then the reporting will be poor. If they are still using him when they can go into Gaza again, without framing as a very biased source, then that would be more of an issue.

Out of interest, where does the rakish-looking photograph come from?

On a side note: Gabriela Shalev’s speech last night to the UNSC was really moving! She’s a great speaker!

Tinter

“On the BBC casualty figure issue, in terms of reporting quality it is probably as you say. However, worrying about millions hearing his lies is pretty meaningless- changing the figure to 640 vs 10 doesn’t change the ratio or much at all”

I do agree. That he lied in this case (or chose his figures inconsistently and deliberately) is indisputable. However he is filing reports several times a day across the BBC network across the full range of daily events in Gaza. That is where it is problematic.

MattG

Its reasonable to interview him as a doctor on the ground in Gaza, as it is reasonable to interview an IDF spokesperson, regardless of eithers personal views.

I’m in complete agreement with this and also with David T. It is important to note this guy whilst he is there offering humanitarian assistance (which I do applaud him for) he also has a political agenda and fairly warped view of the world.

Also Tinter,

he will know that 140 odd Hamas members died on day one, and several hundred more since. The suggestion that there are 640 dead Gazans (giving the impression they are all or almost all civilians) is a little dishonest.

MattG

I’ll clarify, Tinter, I don’t infer any ill-intent on the part of the Beeb. There will be a need for English-speaking interviewees in Gaza, and despite what the more delirious posters here may think, the Beeb was a decent enough resource before this and a much more balanced case has been put here.

Gilbert is, to a great extent, placing himself in high physical danger and I don’t doubt he has a concern for Gazans based on their being humans and not ciphers against Israel. However, such concern appears negligible when victims of violence don’t come from designated countries.

MattG: That he lied in this case (or chose his figures inconsistently and deliberately) is indisputable.

It a serious error, but I don’t think its clear it was made in a deliberate manner. He probably just got given the Palestinian count as one total, as the militants are not officially organised and are hard to seperate out, and an Israeli civilians death count (as IDF casualites do come in seperately) and read them out without consideration. Yes this is wrong, but theres no cause to make assumptions as to motivations and assume a hostile media conspiracy. Thats not sensible whichever side does it.

I would be intersted in knowing the harrys place view on a couple of things. Firstly, is the truce for aid consistent with previous statements that the aid situation in Gaza was fine? Secondly, (generously) allowing that there was mortar fire from the UN-school building, was the decision to attack it with the force used proportionate and reasonable?

I think we have to wait to see precisely how these deaths were caused.

If, as the IDF reported, the school was being used as a missile launching and storage site, and if the explosions were amplified by the detonation of Hamas ordinance, then it is very difficult to blame Israel.

If that is not the case, then Israel’s acts are reprehensible.

At the moment, the facts are at best unclear. However, we do know that Hamas does not take particular care to keep civilians out of harm’s way. Perhaps they don’t care. Or perhaps they are gambling on Israeli soldiers not shooting back when shot at from mosques and schools. Or – worse – perhaps they see the situation as win-win: with civilian deaths assisting in the pressure for Israel to stop fighting, so that Hamas can re-arm and continue the battle.

“Dead civilians are the same whether they are Americans, Palestinians or Iraqis.”

Is this a controversial position?

Insofar as all are innocent victims, of course not. However, if some are killed during the pursuit of a legitimate military objective whilst maintaining efforts to minimise civilian casualties, but others are in fact the intended victims of a specific act, then we should recognise this distinction, as dictated by Geneva Conventions and commonly understood ‘rules of war’.

As Gilbert likes to conflate all civilian death, including those tageted on 9/11, he clearly rejects this distinction and is therefore pondlife demanding of our scorn.

“then it is very difficult to blame Israel.”
I think the level of the lethality of the hamas position combined with the fufilled number of casualties would make that specific attack disproportionate. Surely, in any case, attacking such position without such a casualty rate is what the ground operation is for? Otherwise why go in?

“If that is not the case, then Israel’s acts are reprehensible.”

But if it is policy to attack such places when they are used, it is inevitable that there will be, on occasion, poor intelligence leading to actions that you would find reprehensible. Surely the only way to avoid actions that you find reprehensible is to not use such attacks on such locations?

“Or – worse – perhaps they see the situation as win-win: with civilian deaths assisting in the pressure for Israel to stop fighting, so that Hamas can re-arm and continue the battle.”

But if it is win-win for Hamas then once again, even from your perspective, is it not better to not conduct such actions?

Gilbert reminds me of Zin: Another lunatic fringe communist trying to get media access to push propaganda. Except that at least this Gilbert guy has a useful day job.

But if it is win-win for Hamas then once again, even from your perspective, is it not better to not conduct such actions?

In that case, you’re effectively handing victory over to whichever side is prepared to be the most ruthless.

If Hamas is indeed conducting war in a manner that exposes the maximum number of Palestinians to harm, and doing nothing to protect its own civilians, then it is the most ruthless.

But Israel could be as ruthless as Syria or a number of other Arab countries have been, with the Muslim Brotherhood. In Syria, to defeat the Muslim Brotherhood, Bashir Sr sealed off the city of Hamas and killed everybody in it. 20,000 dead, or more.

That was in 1982 – the same year that Phalangists killed 800 at Sabra and Shatilla.

But if it is policy to attack such places when they are used, it is inevitable that there will be, on occasion, poor intelligence leading to actions that you would find reprehensible. Surely the only way to avoid actions that you find reprehensible is to not use such attacks on such locations?

The only way to truly avoid such actions is to avoid military activity altogether. Show me the war where such actions haven’t presented?

That said, I agree there is a valid point to be made about the rules of engagement within urban locations as they appear to be currently practised by the IDF. On the other hand, this could be simply case of an OC instructing a return of fire in the fog of war. As I began, there isn’t really anyway for Israel to guarantee that such things do not repeat short of refusing to ever engage Hamas militarily. And what do we suppose Hamas would do with such knowledge?

According to today’s Aftenposten (Norwegian daily) he is soon to leave Gaza via the Rafah crossing.

http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/uriks/article2853216.ece

DavidT:”In that case, you’re effectively handing victory over to whichever side is prepared to be the most ruthless.”
I was only refering to one specific action. Its not the difference between victory and defeat. Not bombing that school would not have had a significant impact on the operations overall success. I repeat my query about what the ground operation is for if it isn’t left to deal with such positions.

As to Syria- I think we both expect more of Israel than least worst in the middle east. I have no time for any of these petty dictatorships, and wish the left who are so very focused on Israel would put some of that effort into condeming the American assistance some of them recieve.

However, your bringing it up is just evading the issue. Possibly you think I am of the far left?

Brownie: “The only way to truly avoid such actions is to avoid military activity altogether. Show me the war where such actions haven’t presented?”
Yes, if Israel chooses to bomb Gaza it may hit a school regardless. However, a policy of not bombing a position if it is in the UN schools would obviously make this less likely. It does appear that Israel knew where they were bombing in this case. I think Israels code of engagment does not appear to place a high enough priority on avoiding heavily civilianized targets.

He’s also getting the attention of the extreme-left in the USA

http://www.marjoriecohn.com/

This article is also featured on Huffington post

I have written to Ms Cohn urging her to inform her readers of
Dr Gilbert’s reliability as a source. I urge others to do the same.

Well, I think that it is worth stating that the shells fell, not ON a UN School but NEAR one.

What caused the casualties is the key question. Were the deaths of 30-40 people the forseeable result of shelling missile launchers who were near a school? Did they die as a result of shockwave damage/shrapnel from those shells? Or did the Israeli barrage set off Hamas ordinance in or near the school?

That’s what I would like to know.

What do you think the chances are of the BBC, The Times, CNN, the Independent, or any other major news organisations telling us about Dr Mads Gilbert’s extreme and vicious politics, next time he makes an appearance?

None.

Look here for example at what the Guardian is promoting today on its front page.

In Pictures: Israeli Troops in Gaza

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gallery/2009/jan/04/israel-gaza-ground-troops?picture=341415879

33 beautifully shot images or dead Palestinian women and children and Israeli soldiers/civilians in mock heroic poses. And whats missing in these 33 images?

A single picture of a Hamas fighter.

Anyone uninformed person looking at these pictures would believe that Israelis (soldiers & civilians) have gone on a killing rampage in Gaza. Which is what teh Guardian wants its readers to believe.

This is not news to me. I’ve said it heer for a long time. There is a deep bond between the Reactionary Left and the Islamist Right. Many here are in denial about it.

Nick Cohen has only touched on this in “Whats Left” he has skirted the issue. The issue isnt whats left, the issue is the alliance between the reactionary Left and the facist Islamist Right.

Maybe Nick should take time off and write another book that deals with the issue head on.

“Or did the Israeli barrage set off Hamas ordinance in or near the school?”

But this is just something you yourself have come up with. I have seen no suggestion, much less evidence, that this is the case. The accounts are quite clear- they fired mortars outside the school then fled. Israel responded with shelling, hitting the civilians who had not fled. You must have read the accounts and know the above is not what happened. If you have not:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ioi_0jtO9RjMwPNRoXNCndRPRq3gD95HS69G0

Really, Israel used mortars, which are a weapon that seems very ill-suited to the environment they are operating in.

Really, Israel used mortars, which are a weapon that seems very ill-suited to the environment they are operating in.

What are you Tinter an expert in close quarters combat in civilian areas?

Also, I think I have to ask again about the aid issue. Israel made clear in the past:
1- a truce would interfere with its operations
2- That there was no problem with the aid situation in gaza
Now, a truce has been allowed in order to help deal with the problematic aid situation in Gaza. I do not see how this action can be reconciled with Israels earlier statements.

Fair enough, Mads. Kill him, we can’t and shouldn’t distinguish his presence.

“What are you Tinter an expert in close quarters combat in civilian areas?”

It was an aside, not a point of argument, and I am happy to be corrected; but as far as I am aware mortars, even modern ones, are very far from a precision weapon.

I think the chances of him being exposed are zero, especially in the Guardian, when you consider i had a comment deleted by the moderator yesterday in response to Khalid Mish’al article in which i mentioned he was an anti semite.

so if you can’t call a member of Hamas an anti semite anymore then there is no chance of a balanced view in an increasingly odious paper.

Honestly does anyone else agree that the guardian is now as bad as the daily mail for sheer stupidity?

“But Israel could be as ruthless as Syria or a number of other Arab countries have been, with the Muslim Brotherhood. In Syria, to defeat the Muslim Brotherhood, Bashir Sr sealed off the city of Hamas and killed everybody in it. 20,000 dead, or more.” (I think you mean Hama and Assad senior.)

It’s certainly an interesting point of comparison. There are some significant differences which are worth noting. First of all, despite a period of initial tolerance for the activities of the MB, they had just tried to assassinate Assad Senior and had over-run Hama, murdering government officials and their families. Without wishing to belittle the fear that the folks of Sderot and similar towns live under, Hamas’ rocket-throwers scarcely offer the same threat to the Israeli state, or anything like the same bodycount. Incidentally, as gruesome and indiscriminate as the Syrian action was, they didn’t “seal off the city of Hamas and kill everybody in it”. They gave advance warning of the attack so that most civilians left. Hama is a city of around 400,000 people, not 20,000.

Morality aside (and it certainly shouldn’t be), I think the not especiallly Ba’athist correspondent Thomas Friedman has noted that Syria has been largely untroubled by Islamist extremism since, although public revulsion with the MB’s tactics is a factor here.

“That was in 1982 – the same year that Phalangists killed 800 at Sabra and Shatilla.”
I note that you go with a high estimate of the death toll at Hama, and a low one in Beirut, but since no-one really knows either way that’s by the by. The material difference between the two is that Hama was a combat situation, at Sabra and Shatila, the IDF sealed off refugee camps where the men and arms had left, and let the Maronites in to cold-bloodedly murder women, children and old men, at one point firing off flares so they could see what they were doing.

Both massacres are horrific crimes which have pretty much gone unpunished.

“Without wishing to belittle the fear that the folks of Sderot and similar towns live under, Hamas’ rocket-throwers scarcely offer the same threat to the Israeli state, or anything like the same bodycount. ”

Isn’t that basically because there’s a huge security barrier, which makes it difficult for Hamas to get in?

It doesn’t surprise me that a doctor who is willing to go to Gaza has some moontbat left wing views, however the guy is saving a lot of kids at the moment. That’s the main thing as far as I’m concerned.

Good on Israel for allowing loads of aid through today; they deserve praise for that.

David T
“Isn’t that basically because there’s a huge security barrier, which makes it difficult for Hamas to get in?”
Not especially I don’t think. The Muslim Brotherhood had serious aspirations to take over Syria, whatever their rhetoric or rambling wishlist, Hamas are nowhere near doing the same thing to Israel.

Without wishing to belittle the fear that the folks of Sderot and similar towns live under, Hamas’ rocket-throwers scarcely offer the same threat to the Israeli state, or anything like the same bodycount.

Not this again. Think about the meaning of the word “terrorism” and what the goals of those who practise it are.

They gave advance warning of the attack so that most civilians left.

Just like Fallujia, then.

Well not really, although that is a more apt point of comparison than Sabra and Shatila.

It was an aside, not a point of argument, and I am happy to be corrected; but as far as I am aware mortars, even modern ones, are very far from a precision weapon.

I’m happy to correct you:

Fireball – Precision Mortar Munition, an Israeli-developed precision mortar system that “With laser designation, the bomb can reach an accuracy of 1 meter CEP or less, attacking stationary or moving targets.”

And here he is in the News Line, the newspaper of the rape-cult

It is still a rape cult, David?

It was an aside, not a point of argument, and I am happy to be corrected; but as far as I am aware mortars, even modern ones, are very far from a precision weapon.

The is dependent on a lot of factors so unless we know where the counter fire came from and from which weapon it’s not worthwhile commenting on.

As an example a modern 120mm mortar has a max range of around 7.3km and fired at the max range has a round could land within 1km of the targeted spot in the worst possible conditions. Although the ‘probable error’ (50% of the rounds fired landing within this distance) is more like 100m. Decreasing the distance fired at increases the accuracy of fire significantly (as it removes the errors introduced by weather conditions).

In terms of their use in combat by HAMAS (in comparison to lobbing mortars into Israel) they probably got a variety of positions it can fire mortars from along with pre-computed firing solutions for different places. This way all it takes is someone with a radio to spot and they can quickly and accurately call in fire on Israeli soldiers as they move past landmarks (e.g. road junctions). The mortar teams can also hide out of sight with a cache of rounds until required. These sort of tactics were used to great effect by the insurgents in Fallujah against the American and Iraqi troops.

Israel are at a disadvantage in that they won’t have these potential firing positions worked out in advance and are relying on counter-battery information as well as spotting where the mortar teams are operating from by air.

What do you know – a doctor with political opinions. Whatever next?

The background information suggests that the Norwegian doctor, in addition to providing medical services to the population of the Gaza Strip, is also volunteering as a propagandist for Hamas. Everything he is reported as saying should therefore be read with this background in mind. The evidence suggests he may have no compunction about falsifying the observed facts, to suit the Hamas propaganda needs of the moment.

Meh: I wasn’t refering to Hamas as I don’t expect them to be all that worried about precision anyway, and as you stated they can have pre-prepared firing information. I was refering to mortars use in Israeli offensives using only data given from fireobservers. However, according to Morgoth they can be used with great accuracy regardless, so I stand corrected on that; not that they were used as such in the relevant case.

The Muslim Brotherhood had serious aspirations to take over Syria, whatever their rhetoric or rambling wishlist, Hamas are nowhere near doing the same thing to Israel.

Isn’t that because they’re being killed in large numbers?

Morgoth beat me to it with his GPS/laser guided round it seems. Although it does require someone to paint the target with a laser for maximum accuracy (which is astonishingly accurate).

I don’t know why people are making a fuss of the brief ceasefire to allow in aid. The Nazi’s used to do that. The Germans quite often negotiated ceasefires in battles they were winning, to allow the dead, injured and dying Allied troops to be removed from the battlefields.

Dr Mads Gilbert’s extreme and vicious politics

What active support does he give to any terrorist organisation? There is a difference between that and being mouthy or hot headed. There is enormous reliance on rhetoric here.

So lets get back to bloody reality. Who kills more civilians – I think you’ll find its the Israelis today by a long chalk. The extremists have the rhetoric, while Israel actually kills the most innocent men, women and children. Do you think, apart from bringing so much death and harm to Palestinians, it might brutalise Israelis?

Does the current state of affairs get us anywhere?

David T
“Isn’t that because they’re being killed in large numbers?”

No, if anything current events will strengthen them, or whatever unpleasant thing comes in their wake.

Isn’t that because they’re being killed in large numbers?

No. Much as it might tempt some to cheerily think an extermination policy on Hamas is necessary to ’save Israel’ from the barbarians at the gate, that is not actually necessary to prevent Hamas taking over Israel. Hamas had not a sniff of chance of taking over Israel previously, and of course it hasn’t now.

No, if anything current events will strengthen them

I don’t think anyone really cares how ’strong’ Hamas is in the political sense if they are no longer attacking Israel or rearming via Gaza’s southern border.

Or rather, whilst Egypt and Jordan might care about Hamas’ political strength, Israel’s primary concern is neutralising Hamas’ ability to do or threaten harm to her citizens.

If after the dust has settled and a peace accord is in place Hamas are returned to power in Gaza as heroes but their arms supply from Iran has been choked off and there are no rockets flying across Israel’s southern border, do you think the people of Sderot will view the war as a success or failure?

if they are no longer attacking Israel or rearming via Gaza’s southern border.

Oh, please. Don’t tell me you actually believe that’s what this is only about?

Fuck off, Benji.

Brownie, you’ve stated elsewhere that you don’t support the incursion by ground forces into Gaza. Have you changed your mind, or are you just playing devil’s advocate?
In answer to your question, given that there are a lot of conditionals there, and neither of us can predict the future, I’d posit another question: do Israelis or anyone else for that matter, view the 2006 Lebanon War as a victory for the IDF?

No, if anything current events will strengthen them, or whatever unpleasant thing comes in their wake.

Let’s call this the Mike S worldview: if you try to kill Hamas you’ll make a bunch of genocidal fascists stronger, therefore don’t try to kill them, thus making them stronger anyway. In both cases, Mike S wins because he can feel smug and superior whilst Jews are being killed.

Why is it with Mike S and TheIrie and the Guardian types that they give the impression that its all about them?

I might ask you the same question.

I’d posit another question: do Israelis or anyone else for that matter, view the 2006 Lebanon War as a victory for the IDF?

It wasn’t an overwhelming victory for the IDF – Hesbollah’s friends in the UN saw to that, but Hezbollah lost a third of its strength and was pushed back 40-50 miles.

I might ask you the same question.

Ask Churchill why he wanted Nazi Germany defeated.

I want Hamas destroyed (down to the last cowardly fucker hiting in basements beneath hospitals and schools) because Hamas are a genocidal bunch of Nazis who are a direct threat to the rest of the human race. A direct threat is a hell of a lot more to worry about than personal feelings of smugness, Mike S.

I’m not smug Morgoth, just sick of people being killed.

Brownie, you’ve stated elsewhere that you don’t support the incursion by ground forces into Gaza. Have you changed your mind, or are you just playing devil’s advocate?

I said before the ground incursion that there should be a ceasefire, so to that extent, yes, I suppose I ‘oppose’ the ground assault. I don’t see how anything I wrote above contradicts that. I was merely articulating what I think the Israeli rationale is. I don’t dispute the logic of their rationale, it’s just that I’m unconvinced that the loss of life is justified. At least, it wasn’t in the first few days of the campaign when concrete gains for Israel seemed a long way off and aid agencies where reporting humanitarian crisis of epic proportions.

I have to say that if we have more or less reached an endpoint and the result is genuine efforts by Egypt to choke off arms to Hamas and global, external pressure to compel Hamas to desist in their attacks on Israel, then the equation is altered.

(Moreover, however terrible life in Gaza is right now, I’m not aware of a single death that is not a direct consequence of the military action. Meaning, people are not starving, dying of diseease or freezing to death in the winter nights. No, I’m not a heartless bastard with no compassion for Palestinian civilians, but if this is a catastrophic humanitarian crisis – which is a direct quote from the Red Cross – then how do we describe the situation in Zimbabwe, or Congo, or Darfur? I’m saying, hesitatingly, that the humanitarian disaster being predicted by the aid agencies – and I ascribe no blame…it is their job to, if you like, talk these things up – was a factor in my opposition, but unless I’m missing the reports it seems our worst fears have not been realised. Thankfully. And we now have the commitment by Israel to relax the blockade and open up more aid channels.)

On the other hand, if we’ve still got weeks of bloodshed ahead of us and and result is a non-sustainable peace and a resumption of rocket fire, then my initial instinct will have been right.

I’m not smug Morgoth, just sick of people being killed.

Would you blame the rape victim who kills her rapist in self-defense?

Would you call for a ceasefire in 1944 just before Operation Overlord?

do Israelis or anyone else for that matter, view the 2006 Lebanon War as a victory for the IDF

Very few.

Do I get an answer to my question, now?

Very few.

I fail to see how killing a THIRD of your enemies’ fighting strength (when in modern professional armies 10% is considered unacceptable) and pushing them back 50 miles in a matter of weeks could be anything other than a victory.

If its just about stopping rockets, well, Hamas implemented a total ceasefire of its rockets and mortars for four and a half months in 2008. This ceasefire was deemed a success – by Israel itself. It could have worked on another ceasefire, and built confidence that way. It could have done that without killing any civilians in Gaza, or destroying any infrastructure.

But its not just about rockets, which are not a major physical threat anyway. It may be about many things. One theory is that when Israel waved its big dick around in Lebanon in 2006, Hez stuck around to tell it was actually rather small. This was an embarrassment in front of the USA, for one thing, who was expecting it to do rather better against Hez. So now it needs to make point, in an attempt to restore “deterrence”. Of course, this has little to do solving any of the problems of the Middle East, nor will it defeat Hamas, but there you go.

Morgoth

Hez is not a professional army, its a stateless guerrilla force. Hence, to be seen as victors, Israel had to seriously dislodge it and disarm it – its war aim was to disarm it and knock out its capacity to fire rockets. It failed.

Morgoth
“Would you blame the rape victim who kills her rapist in self-defense?”
No, but I might have a problem with her killing the rest of his family an everyone who lives down his street.

Would you call for a ceasefire in 1944 just before Operation Overlord?
This is not WWII and Hamas are not the Nazis. Hamas are not occupying huge swathes of Europe, nor are they running a network of death camps.

No, but I might have a problem with her killing the rest of his family an everyone who lives down his street.

The rest of his family who were involved in the rape as well. And the rapist, whilst continuing to rape, holding his own daughter hostage to stop the police intervening.

This is not WWII and Hamas are not the Nazis. Hamas are not occupying huge swathes of Europe, nor are they running a network of death camps.

They would if they got the chance. They have said as much. Their self-declared aims make the Nazis look like fluffy bunnies.

Have you not absorbed anything that this website has posted? The Hamas Charter? The countless statements by Hamas and Hezbollah that their ultimate end-goal is a worldwide ISlamic theocracy?

Brownie, to return to your question then.
“If after the dust has settled and a peace accord is in place Hamas are returned to power in Gaza as heroes but their arms supply from Iran has been choked off and there are no rockets flying across Israel’s southern border, do you think the people of Sderot will view the war as a success or failure?”

If that very large and looming “if” can be negotiated, the answer will undoubtedly be as a success. There remains a moral question that will be pondered by those of us out of Qassam range over whether 150-200 Palestinian civilians being killed in a week to nullify a threat that had claimed the lives of around 8 Israeli civilians over 8 years is fair and right, but I doubt the people of Sderot will give this much thought. I don’t blame them, as indeed I doubt any of us would in their position.

More relevantly to them, is the long-term question of how this is going to perceived by the population in Gaza. I honestly don’t feel optimistic about it.

Ah Benjamin don’t be too hard on old Brownie. His knowledge of the Israel-Palestine conflict is restricted to the laughable propaganda and disinformation constantly pumped out by this place.

If Brownie is serious about becoming better informed about the background to the conflict he could start by reading Avi Shlaim’s, ‘The Iron Wall’, the most rigorous and widely respected history of the conflict. Shlaim has a very good piece in today’s Guardian, if Brownie can’t face the slog through such a weighty tome.

As always, mighty Israel claims to be the victim of Palestinian aggression but the sheer asymmetry of power between the two sides leaves little room for doubt as to who is the real victim. This is indeed a conflict between David and Goliath but the Biblical image has been inverted – a small and defenceless Palestinian David faces a heavily armed, merciless and overbearing Israeli Goliath. The resort to brute military force is accompanied, as always, by the shrill rhetoric of victimhood and a farrago of self-pity overlaid with self-righteousness. In Hebrew this is known as the syndrome of bokhim ve-yorim, “crying and shooting.”

This brief review of Israel’s record over the past four decades makes it difficult to resist the conclusion that it has become a rogue state with “an utterly unscrupulous set of leaders”. A rogue state habitually violates international law, possesses weapons of mass destruction and practises terrorism – the use of violence against civilians for political purposes. Israel fulfils all of these three criteria; the cap fits and it must wear it. Israel’s real aim is not peaceful coexistence with its Palestinian neighbours but military domination.

Read it all.

Hmm, he seems very biased and hysterical for such a respected historian

Morgoth: The Soviet Union also ran death camps, conducted mass rapes in territory the took militarily and a slate of other crimes that I’m sure the readers of Harrys Place don’t need me to outline.

Should the allies in 1945 have carried straight on fighting, taking on the Reds in the shell of Germany?

Or rather, should we debate issues as they are, understanding that the complex issues make things different case-by-case, instead of making ever more strained arguments by analogy?

Oh, and I still haven’t had anyone state how the Israeli truce was consistent with a truce being militarily harmful and not necessary for humanitarian reasons prior to their deciding to have one. How is this consistent? Why could we not have had a truce earlier than this?

Mike S

If that very large and looming “if” can be negotiated, the answer will undoubtedly be as a success. There remains a moral question that will be pondered by those of us out of Qassam range over whether 150-200 Palestinian civilians being killed in a week to nullify a threat that had claimed the lives of around 8 Israeli civilians over 8 years is fair and right, but I doubt the people of Sderot will give this much thought. I don’t blame them, as indeed I doubt any of us would in their position.

There is no answer to that Mike S.

If it was your child against 200 innocent Palestinian children, what would you choose.

There simply is no rational answer.

Mads Gilbert: “The statistics are clear. Among the two thousand four, five hundred injured, 45% are women and children.”

—

This is the same thing I have read in the N.Y. Times. Do you think that Andrew Rosenthal has a secret commie past as well?

There remains a moral question that will be pondered by those of us out of Qassam range over whether 150-200 Palestinian civilians being killed in a week to nullify a threat that had claimed the lives of around 8 Israeli civilians over 8 years is fair and right, but I doubt the people of Sderot will give this much thought.

Well I pondered it myself and found myself calling for a ceasefire, but let’s not pretend this is just about 8 civlians in 8 years. Israel fears Gaza becoming an Iranian proxy if it isn’t one already and until this war and the commitment by Egypt to close arms routes into Gaza, Israel was looking forward to more accurate and longer-range missiles flying over her border in the years to come.

I don’t feel comfortable telling Israel she needs to wait for a scud to take out an apartment block in Tel Aviv before she can justify taking steps to nullify the threat from Hamas.

Among the two thousand four, five hundred injured, 45% are women and children.

If it’s true, it’s truly awful. Of course, the fact that women and children make up a much higher proportion of the injured than they do of the dead, tells you what about Israeli targeting?*

*I’m not justifying the injuries to over a thousand women and children, but asking people with your take on this conflict to reflect on what this ostensible statistical anomaly tells you about Israel’s targeting strategy.

It is 1933 and I am Churchill.

Yet again.

Thank you David T.

I have watched Mads’s ‘unbiased and unbigoted’ interviews and suspected that he was heavy with political agenda.

Oh, and I still haven’t had anyone state how the Israeli truce was consistent with a truce being militarily harmful and not necessary for humanitarian reasons prior to their deciding to have one. How is this consistent? Why could we not have had a truce earlier than this?

I’ll have a stab. Israel feared a truce in the earliest days of this conflict would have afforded Hamas an opportunity to regroup and hide arms. Now that the low-hanging fruit has been harvested, Israel feels that 3 hour truces each day are something they can live with, espcially given whatever humanitarian issues exist in Gaza, they will be more acute today than they were 12 days ago.

I’d repeat, despite the fact that conditions in Gaza must be truly awful, we haven’t had a humanitarian catastrophe and it now looks, God-willing, that we won’t get one.

For the hard of understanding, I am not understating the suffering of Palestinian civilians in Gaza, rather I’m stating that Israel’s refusal to accede to a truce until now was not resulting in mass starvation or death from disease that we might very well have witnessed without the framework for a settlement that now exists.

Brownie: That was about the answer I expected, but it does mean that the many israeli statements on how great the aid situation in gaza was and the lack of any need for a truce were all tripe.

“The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs states that the Gaza strip humanitarian crisis is significant and cannot be understated. The UN states that the situation is a “human dignity crisis” in the Gaza strip, entailing “a massive destruction of livelihoods and a significant deterioration of infrastructure and basic services”. Fear and panic are widespread; 80 percent of the population cannot support themselves and are dependent on humanitarian assistance. A psychiatrist, who is the head of Gaza’s mental health program, has estimated that nearly half of the population will suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder.” Wikipedia.

Given the situation, it simply boggles the mind how Livni can say there’s no humanitarian crisis there and that the humanitarian situation is “completely as it should be”. It’s simply breathtaking that anyone in her position could say something so utterly crass.

Brownie: That was about the answer I expected, but it does mean that the many israeli statements on how great the aid situation in gaza was and the lack of any need for a truce were all tripe.

Well, not necessarily. Like I say, the situation now is not what it was last week or 12 days ago. Moreover, it does seem that the severity of the crisis was somewhat overstated by the aid agencies. No complaints there; that is their job.

By the way, is David T’s smear job on Mads Gilbert an attempt to suggest he is lying about what he sees as a doctor in Gaza? From the interviews I have seen, Gilbert is clearly there to discuss the conditions in the medical centres, and the general humanitarian situation, in his position as a first hand witness and as a medical doctor. It would be decidedly odd for the BBC or anyone else to start discussing with him any involvement he has with a tiny political grouping called Red in Norway. In fact, it would be completely absurd.

“What do you think the chances are of the BBC, The Times, CNN, the Independent, or any other major news organisations telling us about Dr Mads Gilbert’s extreme and vicious politics, next time he makes an appearance?”

Er, not even high?

“By the way, is David T’s smear job on Mads Gilbert an attempt to suggest he is lying about what he sees as a doctor in Gaza? From the interviews I have seen, Gilbert is clearly there to discuss the conditions in the medical centres, and the general humanitarian situation, in his position as a first hand witness and as a medical doctor. It would be decidedly odd for the BBC or anyone else to start discussing with him any involvement he has with a tiny political grouping called Red in Norway. In fact, it would be completely absurd.” – Benjamin.

The use of “odd”, decidely or otherwise, seems, in this context, a bit, ummm, odd.

If Dr. Gilbert had had dealings with a “tiny” Neo-Conservative grouping would your attitude be equally understanding? When do anyone’s political affiliations become an embarassment, I wonder?

Brownie: “Well, not necessarily. Like I say, the situation now is not what it was last week or 12 days ago. Moreover, it does seem that the severity of the crisis was somewhat overstated by the aid agencies.”

Israel took the same line on the truce until shortly before they had one. It was obviously tripe.

I’m not sure what you’re getting at. I’ve already said Israel was more than likely balancing its strategic advantage having caught Hamas with their pants down against the need for a truce to alleviate a looming humanitarian crisis.

And unless you think the lot of the Palestinian civlians in Gaza has remained constant since day one of the conflict, instead of growing progressively worse day by day, I’m not sure what’s so controversial about arguing that what might be necessary now wasn’t yesterday, or the day before.

This guy is a shill, read this!

Norwegian Doctor in Gaza – Unbiased?

Who needs more proof Benji is a twat?

By the way, is David T’s smear job on Mads Gilbert an attempt to suggest he is lying about what he sees as a doctor in Gaza? From the interviews I have seen, Gilbert is clearly there to discuss the conditions in the medical centres, and the general humanitarian situation, in his position as a first hand witness and as a medical doctor. It would be decidedly odd for the BBC or anyone else to start discussing with him any involvement he has with a tiny political grouping called Red in Norway. In fact, it would be completely absurd.” – Benjamin

Chicken and Egg. First he was outed as propagandist liar and THEN people looked into his background. and discovered he good cause to lie.

There was no sudden change in the situation, but there was a sudden change in Israels view on the matter, because their earlier views were just propogandising to delay the international response.

There was no sudden change in the situation, but there was a sudden change in Israels view on the matter, because their earlier views were just propogandising to delay the international response.

I’d dispute “just propogandising”, in that there was genuine strategic advantage to denying a truce in the early days. If Israel had done this while a genuine humanitarian catastrophe unfolded, this would be reprehensible. As it is, I’m not aware of a single death as a result of the humanitarian crisis rather than as a direct consequence of the fighting itself.

I not suggesting we should be slapping Israel’s back following their belated decision to institute a daily truce, but neither were they overseeing the humanitarian catastrophe that some claimed.

What you should do, David T, is find out if this doctor is Jewish, as his last name suggests. And if he is, you should report him to Masada 2000.

Or is he already on the Self-Hating Israel-Threatening (SHIT) Jews list?

Did Mads really say its like Dante’s Inferno in the Gaza?The same Dante who calls Mohammed, Mahound and casts him towards the outer fringes like wot is says in the original text in the British Library at Kings Cross.

The point I was making about Mads Gilbert is this: he’s standing in busy hospital in a war zone being asked about his observations of the scene. David T is asking the BBC to pepper him with questions about his own political affiliations, and/or explain to the viewers that he is medical doctor and a member of minor leftist party in Norway. It’s simply absurd. Doctors and eye witnesses interviewed in war zones have various political leanings no doubt; they are not required to reveal them every time they speak from hospital and a war zone, nor should they face questions about them in that situation. Its bizarre.

Of course, one can find out about Gilbert’s politics, and it may be relevant to disclose it in a different context, but in the context that Gilbert appears in its simply not asked or disclosed. It would be very odd if it was.

“The point I was making about Mads Gilbert is this: he’s standing in busy hospital in a war zone being asked about his observations of the scene. David T is asking the BBC to pepper him with questions about his own political affiliations, and/or explain to the viewers that he is medical doctor and a member of minor leftist party in Norway. It’s simply absurd. Doctors and eye witnesses interviewed in war zones have various political leanings no doubt; they are not required to reveal them every time they speak from hospital and a war zone, nor should they face questions about them in that situation. Its bizarre.” – Benjamin.

When in a hole one should stop digging. Dr. Gilbert was not ‘peppered’ with questions anything like enough, if at all, and this did once used to happen. Ask any old timer trades unionist.

It is entirely likely that the interviewer did not know Dr. Gilbert’s views, hence the resultant interview lacked the dimension of interogation. However, this viewer thought it strange that he was there at all; given the dangers nurses and doctors suffer around the globe from ministering to the sick – several have been murdered by Islamists in Afghanistan for example – I imagined Dr. Gilbert must have some protection and since he had not changed his name, was not a Moslem. How then did he maintain his own security? For answer I had to come here to discover.

Dr. Gilbert is clearly partisan. That is his priviledge. It would be helpful in understanding the points Dr. Gilbert made if this affiliation were made plain. It does not undermine, as such, the medical report but separating accurate verifiable fact from propaganda is essential and journalists have been angry to discover their reports have been manipulated for propaganda purposes since at least the Korean War, and rightly so.

But this all beside the point. The people Dr. Gilbert is seeking to heal are the victims of a wilful and spiteful campaign which should never have happened. There was no military or political gain to be had ‘peppering’ Israel with Iranian made rockets.

As a former press card holder I would like to point out to this forum that the major media nets do not have representatives in Gaza, and are hungry for anything they can get.
Hamas, like most totalitarian regimes, has always controlled information coming from Gaza to the best of its’ ability. Foreign journalists are provided with “escorts” to ensure they see only what the leaders want them to see. All video cameramen, and still photographers working with journalists in Gaza come from a pool of Hamas approved people. The very fact that any footage featuring the Norwegian doctors was released probably makes it, at best, highly suspect.
Both Dr Gilbert and his colleague, Dr Fosse, should be praised for their medical work. Their political views and credibiity as witnesses, However, is an entirely different matter.

The party in question, AKP, no longer exists. The remaining members of the party were brought into the party Rødt! (red) last year, a new party that has never supported or been in favour of pol pot, or indeed any other dictator. Mads Gilbert and Erik Fosse are doing an amazing job reporting the truth from Gaza, being the only western voices to come from the area due to the Israeli imposed media blackout. They also do wonderful work as medical professionals and are important and well-loved public figures in Norway, where we have great respect for their services to humanity and their strong voice for truth and fairness in the genocide of palestinians.

Palestinian muslims crime history

In 1920s-30s, Palestinian Muslims committed massacre of Jews in Jewish land of Palestine murdering thousands of children and civilians. The murder was organized by the founder and supreme leader of the Arab Higher Committee, Haj Amin al Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem, and supported by British Administration of Palestine. The massacre was, in reality, the Holocaust committed by Palestinian Arabs in compliance with Islamic Koran which demand killing Christians and Jews.

Haj Amin was close friend of Hitler. In 1941, Haj Amin came to Berlin and visited Hitler. He brought the Holocaust idea to Hitler. In 1943, Amin organized Bosnian Muslim battalions in Croatia comprising some twenty thousand men. The battalions were put in Waffen-SS units, fought Yugoslav partisans in Bosnia; thousands of Serbs, Roma (’Gypsies’) and Jews hunted down by Haj Amin’s SS troops were killed by those same troops, or they were sent to the Islamic death camp Jasenovac. After the WWII, the International tribunal declared Haj Amin was crime criminal; however, he escaped prosecution, fled to Egypt and then Palestine where he organized Fatah. After his death in 1974, Arafat, who was Haj Amin lieutenant, became Fatah commander. He organized PLO. PLO and Fatah committed numerous murders around the world killing American and European Christian and Jews.
The 1960s
–December 26, 1968 –two Palestinian gunmen traveled from Beirut to Athens, and attacked an El Al jet and killed one. On December 28,1968, Israel troops landed in Beirut, Lebanon and destroyed 13 civilian aircraft at Beirut International Airport.
The assassination of Robert F. Kennedy, a United States Senator and brother of assassinated President John F. Kennedy, took place shortly after midnight on June 5, 1968. He was killed following celebrations of his successful campaign in the Californian primary elections while seeking the Democratic nomination for President of the United States. The perpetrator was a twenty-four year old Palestinian immigrant named Sirhan Sirhan.
The 1970s
–May 8, 1970: Three Palestinian gunmen crossed the Lebanese border into the agricultural community of Avivim and ambushed the local school bus, killing nine children and three adults, and wounding 19 other children.
–September 4, 1972: Munich Olympic’s Massacre–Members of “Black September,” a PLO offshoot, attacked the Israeli Olympic team in their dormitory at the 1972 Munich Olympic Games in Germany. As a result of the hostage-taking and the bungled attempt by the Germans to rescue the prisoners, eleven Israeli athletes and one German policman were killed. This attack prompted Israel to launch “Operation Wrath of God” and “Operation Spring of Youth.” See below for details.
–Beginning in the Fall of 1972: Israel’s launched “Operation Wrath of God” to track down and kill members of the PLO involved in the Munich attack. This operation continued for several years and resulted in the assassinations of several members of the PLO around the world.
–March 1, 1973: Eight members of Black September took over the Saudi Arabian embassy in Khartoum, Sudan. Among the hostages were two American diplomats, Ambassador Cleo Noel, and Deputy Ambassador George Curtis Moore. Both Americans and Belgian diplomat, Guy Eid were killed.
– April 11, 1974: three guerillas of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), infiltrated the Israeli settlement of Kiryat Shmona from Lebanon, killing eighteen residents of an apartment building, including nine children. The attackers died in battle with Israeli troops.
–May 15, 1974: Fighters of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) entered the Israeli border town of Ma’alot from Lebanon, killed five adults and seizing hostages in a school building. All of the attackers died in battle with Israeli forces, but not before they killed 21 of the school’s students.
–June 27-July 4, 1976: “Operation Entebbe”: On June 27, an Air France flight from Tel Aviv was hijacked by four terrorists, two from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine — External Operations (PFLP-EO) and two from the German terrorst group, “Revolutionäre Zellen.” The plane eventually ended up at Entebbe Airport in Uganda, which was then ruled by dictator Idi Amin. Amin was friendly to the Palestinian cause, and aided the terrorists. Once on the ground, three more Palestininans joined the hijackers. Demands were made for the release of prisoners held by Israel.
Israel responded with a commando raid on the night of July3/July 4. Around 100 Israeli troops in four military transport planes landed at night and rescued the hostages. As a result of the rescue operation,100 of the 103 hostages were freed. Three hostages died. One Israeli soldier died, while 45 Ugandan soldiers were killed eleven Ugandan Army Air Force fighter planes were destroyed on the ground to prevent them from following the Israeli air planes carrying the rescued hostages and the troops.
–March 5,1975: A force of eight PLO fighters sailed from to Tel Aviv by sea from Lebanon. Once inside Israel, they entered the Savoy Hotel, and took dozens of hostages. In the ensuing battle for the hotel, seven of the eight Palestinians and three Israeli troops died, while eight civilians were killed and 19 wounded.
– March 11, 1978: Eight Fatah guerillas entered Israel from Lebanon. After killing an American tourist on the beach, the guerillas hijacked a bus on the coastal road near Haifa. In the ensuing bus chase and battle, six Palestinian guerillas and 35 of the passengers died. Seventy-One civilians were wounded. Israel’s response to this “Coastal Road Massacre” was to launch a full-scale invasion of South Lebanon in order to root out the PLO forces based there.
The 1980s
July 27, 1980: Attack on Jewish school in Antwerp, Belgium by terrorists associated with the Palestinian Abu Nidal.
July 27, 1980: Abu Nidal claimed responsibility for the murder of an Israeli commercial attachee in Brussels, Belgium.
May 1, 1981: Assassination of Heinz Nittel in Vienna, Austria by Abu Nidal’s forces. Nittel was President of the Austrian-Israeli Friendship Association.
June 3, 1982: Attempted assassination in London of Israeli Ambassador to the United Kingdom, Shlomo Argov. Israel accused the PLO of the attack, and the Argov attack was one of the incidents which provoked the Israeli invasion of Lebanon on June 6, 1982 called “Operation Peace in Galilee. Argov survived the attack, but was permanently disabled.
September 25, 1985: Three Israeli civilians were killed on their yacht off the coast of Larnaca, Cyprus by commandoes of al-Fatah’s elite “Force 17.”
-Oct. 7, 1985: The hijacking of the passenger cruise ship Achille Lauro. Members of the Palestine Liberation Front (PLF), led by Abu Abbas, killed Jewish American tourist Leon Klinghoffer. After several days, the hijackers agreed to a deal in which they would release the ship in return for a flight to Tunisia. The Egyptian airliner carrying the hijackers was intercepted by U.S. Navy fighter planes on Oct. 10 and forced it to land at a military base in Italy, where the terrorists were arrested by Italian authorities.
-December 27, 1985: Rome/Vienna Airport Attacks–Abu Nidal’s Fatah – the Revolutionary Council (FRC) staged two attacks in Europe which killed 18 civilians and wounded 140. The terrorists attacked passengers at airports in Rome and Vienna. The FRC claimed these attacks were in response to the October 1st Israeli air raid on Tunis.
September 6 1986 – Istanbul, Turkey
Abu Nidal organization attacks the Neveh Shalom synagogue, killing 22 people.
August 1988 – Haifa: 25 wounded in a grenade attack at the Haifa mall.
July 6 1989 – Tel Aviv: 14 killed when a terrorist steered a bus into a ravine off the Jerusalem-Tel Aviv highway.
The 2000s
In 2002, 5,301 terrorist attacks were perpetrated against Israeli targets, in which 451 Israeli were murdered.
In 2003, 3,838 terrorist attacks were perpetrated against Israeli targets, in which 213 Israelis were murdered.
In 2005, 2,990 terrorist attacks were perpetrated against Israeli targets.
From 2000 to 2004, Hamas was responsible for killing nearly 400 Israelis and wounding more than 2,000 in 425 attacks, according to the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
From 2001 through 2008, Hamas launched more than 5,000 Qassam rockets and 2,500 mortar attacks against Israeli targets.
According to CNN, Hamas uses civilian infrastructure, including schools, houses, kindergarten facilities, hospitals, for storing and launching rockets and other ammunition, placing training camps inside populated areas in violation of Geneva Convention and international law.
The above is only a minuscule part of Palestinian muslims criminal and murderous history; however, it is more than enough to conclude that:
Islamofascist organizations, PLO, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Popular Front of Liberation of Palestine, Fatah etc., must be totally exterminated to last member; other Palestinian muslims must be kicked out of Israel land of Palestine back to the countries of their origin.

Mark Bernadiner, PH.D.
Texas

A lot of spineless Hamas apologists here. Pull your heads out of the sand, people. Every single aspect of this crisis was intentionally created by Hamas.

Your deluded hand-wringing is all about feeling comfortable, and has nothing to do with the truth. The truth is very uncomfortable indeed.

Read about ‘Dar al Islam’ and ‘Dar al Harb.’

Read the Hamas Charter.

If Israel disappeared tomorrow, Muslims would invent a brand new Intolerable Western Outrage to fight the very next day. There is no easy end in sight.

I’m not Jewish. It does not matter. I’m a target anyway, sooner or later, as are we all.

Europe is full of Jew haters who style themselves as ‘concerned humanitarians’ and such. Selling the Jews down the river will not protect you. Every concession made to Islam does not placate the Muslims, instead it further emboldens them and feeds their infernal arrogance. You are surrendering your own societies to these barbarians every day, through the same Left/Islamic convergence embodied by this so-called Norwegian doctor. His lies will get people killed. Some physician.

The bone-head who above referred to a ‘Hamas cease-fire’ is insane. Hamas fired several missiles a day into Israel during that ‘cease-fire.’ How could anybody not know that, unless willfully?

Governments that do nothing while missiles fall into their towns and explode will fall and be replaced by governments that will do something. Even an emasculated European government would have to act.

In Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet, Mads Gilbert’s norwegian colleague Erik Fosse reported about his work in Gaza:

Two Norwegian doctors have worked hard for seven days to save lives in Gaza. But to report to the outside world about what is happening in the war assessing the more important. “Our witness function and to convey what is actually happening have been more important, “says the doctor Erik Fosse to VG Nett.

http://blogg.svansbo.se/2009/01/11/doctor-in-cnn-video-outspoken-communist-and-pro-terror/

————————————————————

Their witness function is more important. Got that?

Mats has never been a member of the Workers’ Communist Party, but in “Red Electoral Alliance”, although affiliated with the Workers’ Communist Party, its not the same thing.

ANd for your information, its Israel whos been keeping jornualists out of Gaza, making Gilbert and Fosse the only westerners in the area. Bit since you would never trust an arab or “leftie”, I guess we have to send down an white, jewish conservative before you understand whats happening.