Helena Cobban points out the double standard here: I still strongly question why [HRW] rushed to get this very definitive and accusatory press release out so very quickly. Especially given that-- as I'd noted here yesterday-- over the past four months HRW had said not one word about Israel's horrible, very harmful resumption, back in July, of the practice of demolishing large numbers family homes in the Gaza Strip for purely punitive purposes. I agree Josh. Yes , palestinians , and generally anyone whom Israel considers a fow must not be allowed to resist otherwise they would be commiting a great crime. Yes folks, resisting Israel is now an official world wide Crime and must never be done. Do not resist Israel no matter what. Even if it kills all creatures world wide and universe wide. Even aliens must not be allowed to resist israel (should they exist ofcourse). Yes, and this all stems for our great rules called freedom and democracy. Yeh man, get with it. You is either with Israel or you is with the enemy. Be very afraid of critisizing Israel because then you will go to Hell immediatly. And you will stay there eternally. Israel is 'The Ki... Yeah, HRW's anti Isreal bias has been so consistently bias. What's going on here? Is the Left's tried and true propaganda structure breaking down? Wow, who can you count on anymore? edit: anti Israel positions have been..... Godfrey, I'm not following at all. There are way too many attempts at sarcasm in this clip to make sense of what anyone's arguments are. Human Rights Watch has been carefully selective in their observations, conclusions, and condemnations. It's a fraudulent organisation in my view. I think you is right Godrey, they are too lenient on Israel. They probably fear being labelled anti-semetic. Upon which event they will all get crucified , as normally is expected these days. a discussion (hopefully rational) about it.. As in, "jolly fine clip, JK, I absolutely agree"? As in, if you make a sweeping claim that an organization is fraudulent, you back it up. Its so important to have evidence to back up what we say. If we dont then what we say may just be repeat propaganda. With no basis in truth. So please , before we say something, remember to ask, do we actually have the evidence to back it up or are we just acting like parrots, repeating what gets said on TV and the media. I make the claim with the knowledge that anyone who's been paying attention has formed an opinion in agreement or disagreement with mine, and that others who have an interest have the world wide Interntets from which to draw far more information than I could provide here, or have an interest in providing. that is , you are saying that you dont have any evidence and that your sole reason for being here is just to spread whatever propaganda the media has put in your mind. Well done. Do you feel proud at all? I challenge you to provide just ONE piece of evidence to back up what you say, and then we can follow it up and scrutinize it. Are you man enough for that?? Last month HRW basically retracted this statement. They said they do not criticize nonviolent resistance, and that the IDF's bombing of the militant's home had no legitimate military objective. So, in the HRW's expert military opinion, there is no military objective in bombing militants? Oooookaaaaayyyy. From HRW: We have since concluded that we were wrong, on the basis of the available evidence, to characterize the IDF’s planned destruction of the house as an act of war. If the planned attack against the house – a three-story building housing three families - was, in fact, an administrative action by the Israeli government aimed at punishing a militant for his alleged activities, the law regulating the conduct of hostilities during armed conflict would not apply and could not be violated. |
View the Top Clips from November 23, 2006
|
||
|
|
|||
