Current WAR CRIMES Israel - Hamas - Hezbollah - Houthis

[Jazny]

You'll also find that there were Zionist militias inside Palestine who sought help from Nazi Germany to fight the British.

Notice the carefully worded propaganda. Saying 'Zionist militias' is a lot more widespread sounding than accurately saying 'the Lehi', who were a fringe group not even close to being representative of Jews in Palestine. These fringe terrorists reluctantly sought Germany's aid against the British saying "If it will bring us independence, we’re ready to make a deal with the devil himself”. This idea went nowhere. Probably because Hitler explicitly was against a Jewish homeland at the time. Propaganda sacrifices accuracy for impact.

Now this doesn't mean Palestinians are Nazis due to the grand mufti of Jerusalem's meeting with Hitler and there is very limited evidence for Nazi support among arabs in Palestine. I only brought it up because it was a funny response to Lunchlady's odd comment about German support for Israel.

 

[stax on the mull]

Notice the carefully worded propaganda. Saying 'Zionist militias' is a lot more widespread sounding than accurately saying 'the Lehi', who were a fringe group not even close to being representative of Jews in Palestine. These fringe terrorists reluctantly sought Germany's aid against the British saying "If it will bring us independence, we’re ready to make a deal with the devil himself”. This idea went nowhere. Probably because Hitler explicitly was against a Jewish homeland at the time. Propaganda sacrifices accuracy for impact.

Now this doesn't mean Palestinians are Nazis due to the grand mufti of Jerusalem's meeting with Hitler and there is very limited evidence for Nazi support among arabs in Palestine. I only brought it up because it was a funny response to Lunchlady's odd comment about German support for Israel.

Funny in what way?

 

[Jazny]

You've heard the recent testimony of a man who was there. Remotely piloted drones deliberately killing children after bombings.

You've seen the video of the 13 year old wounded by drone strike, only to have another strike kill him and another child that came to help him minutes later.

You've seen the testimony of American doctors describing a contant stream of children with bullet wounds to heads and hearts. Not shrapnel, not ricochets, deliberate sniper fire.

You've read about the babies found putrefied, still attached to oxygen tubes in a neo-natal ward in al-Nasr after staff were force evacuated under fire, surrounded by tanks. What do the IDF think is going to happen to those children when they force medical staff to abandon them?

The time for charades is over Jazny.

Although all of this should be taken seriously and investigated, this isn't convincing evidence Israel are targeting babies. For a more nuanced view of the doctors testimony, listen to this interview with the organizer of the letters. Really interesting. I don't know who the interviewer is, it's some weird comedy channel but both of them do a good job of trying to convey their own viewpoints. The doctor's thoughts under questioning are more nuanced than how its often portrayed.



Obviously it cannot and should not be ruled out by anyone that there have not been incidents of children targetted by IDF soldiers, if that's happened throw everything at the utter murderous monsters, but I don't believe the number of babies killed is due to Israel targetting them as policy.

 

[Kurve]

Ali Khomeini is dead according to twitter but nothing official yet.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Funny in what way?

As in not at all.

 

[treeebeard]

You do realise Israel have been ****ing around in Palestine for 75 years?

By Bostonians logic, October 7th is Israel's fault. They ****ed around in Palestine. It's "on them"

 

[Jazny]

As in not at all.

It was objectively funny. The image of the grand mufti sitting with Hitler after you saying the Germans backed Israel completely should have made anyone laugh, if they didn't, they are wrong and I will accept only a delayed laugh and a written apology.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

It was objectively funny. The image of the grand mufti sitting with Hitler after you saying the Germans backed Israel completely should have made anyone laugh, if they didn't, they are wrong and I will accept only a delayed laugh and a written apology.

The Germans backed the Ottoman run genocides completely.

They are now backing the Israeli run genocide unquestioningly.

Your little picture was a sign you didn't comprehend, or an irrelevant non sequitur at best.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Notice the carefully worded propaganda. Saying 'Zionist militias' is a lot more widespread sounding than accurately saying 'the Lehi', who were a fringe group not even close to being representative of Jews in Palestine. These fringe terrorists reluctantly sought Germany's aid against the British saying "If it will bring us independence, we’re ready to make a deal with the devil himself”. This idea went nowhere. Probably because Hitler explicitly was against a Jewish homeland at the time. Propaganda sacrifices accuracy for impact.

Now this doesn't mean Palestinians are Nazis due to the grand mufti of Jerusalem's meeting with Hitler and there is very limited evidence for Nazi support among arabs in Palestine. I only brought it up because it was a funny response to Lunchlady's odd comment about German support for Israel.

A fringe group of terrorists who produced an Israeli Primne Minister, and have a modern military honour named after them - the Lehi Ribbon.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

By Bostonians logic, October 7th is Israel's fault. They ****ed around in Palestine. It's "on them"

I don't think he conforms ot the laws of logic.

 

[Jazny]

A fringe group of terrorists who produced an Israeli Primne Minister, and have a modern military honour named after them - the Lehi Ribbon.

Are you honestly going to try and suggest that a fringe group of terrorists who were denounced as terrorists on the formation of Israel and had 200 members arrested represented the majority view of Jews in Mandatory Palestine? Let's be honest for a moment. They were repeatedly denounced by moderate Jewish leaders. It's like trying to argue Palestinian Islamic Jihad are representative of all Palestinians.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Are you honestly going to try and suggest that a fringe group of terrorists who were denounced as terrorists on the formation of Israel and had 200 members arrested represented the majority view of Jews in Mandatory Palestine? Let's be honest for a moment. They were repeatedly denounced by moderate Jewish leaders. It's like trying to argue Palestinian Islamic Jihad are representative of all Palestinians.

As opposed to the current Israeli far right government that celebrates it's zionist terrorism history?

Are there any other countries that have celebrity rapists doing the rounds of morning talk shows?

 

[Jazny]

Are there any other countries that have celebrity rapists doing the rounds of morning talk shows?

They were rightly arrested. How are your Hamas freedom fighters going with their arresting of the suspected rapists who committed rape on and after October 7th? How many arrests have Hamas made?

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Although all of this should be taken seriously and investigated, this isn't convincing evidence Israel are targeting babies. For a more nuanced view of the doctors testimony, listen to this interview with the organizer of the letters. Really interesting. I don't know who the interviewer is, it's some weird comedy channel but both of them do a good job of trying to convey their own viewpoints. The doctor's thoughts under questioning are more nuanced than how its often portrayed.



Obviously it cannot and should not be ruled out by anyone that there have not been incidents of children targetted by IDF soldiers, if that's happened throw everything at the utter murderous monsters, but I don't believe the number of babies killed is due to Israel targetting them as policy.

Sheesh, you got any cliff notes?

I already saw the Hen Mazzig defence - well how do you know Hamas didn't shoot all the kids in the head with captured IDF weapons?

Doesn't do it for me, sorry.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

They were rightly arrested. How are your Hamas freedom fighters going with their arresting of the suspected rapists who committed rape on and after October 7th? How many arrests have Hamas made?

Who are the suspects? Who are the victimes? Where is the evidence?

Even the Israeli police haven't tried making a case. Nothing revealed to date would stick, in even in a rigged ISraeli military court.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

Are you honestly going to try and suggest that a fringe group of terrorists who were denounced as terrorists on the formation of Israel and had 200 members arrested represented the majority view of Jews in Mandatory Palestine? Let's be honest for a moment. They were repeatedly denounced by moderate Jewish leaders. It's like trying to argue Palestinian Islamic Jihad are representative of all Palestinians.

Did I say that?

They were happily folded into the IDF. Then when they couldn't stop assassinating important people, some of them were arrested, yes.

 

[Kurve]

Who are the suspects? Who are the victimes? Where is the evidence?

Even the Israeli police haven't tried making a case. Nothing revealed to date would stick, in even in a rigged ISraeli military court.

Rape is the lesser offence to murder with most of the victims dead, so you might be right and they won't make charges unless they're raised against those who have confessed to rape.

Yes, I know you're going to say that confessions in Israeli custody don't count.

 

[Jazny]

Sheesh, you got any cliff notes?

I already saw the Hen Mazzig defence - well how do you know Hamas didn't shoot all the kids in the head with captured IDF weapons?

Doesn't do it for me, sorry.

I don't know who Hen Mazzig is and do you think I would be making such a stupid claim with no evidence or reposting a conversation that is that stupid?

I am not trying to defend anyone or debunk the factual claims of what Dr Feroze is saying, just understand what the truth is and the reasons he gives for coming to the conclusion he does and whether his reasoning is sound. This is why the video is worth a listen. I don't know if he has had any semi-combative interviews elsewhere, but it was good to see him have 2 hours to talk about his experiences and beliefs and be challenged on some of it. It's worth listening to if you have spare time, I like to listen to things while I am working.

If you can't be bothered, I will try and write up his reasoning later but I will have to rewatch some of it to make sure I am don't misrepresent him.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

I don't know who Hen Mazzig is and do you think I would be making such a stupid claim with no evidence or reposting a conversation that is that stupid?

I am not trying to defend anyone or debunk the factual claims of what Dr Feroze is saying, just understand what the truth is and the reasons he gives for coming to the conclusion he does and whether his reasoning is sound. This is why the video is worth a listen. I don't know if he has had any semi-combative interviews elsewhere, but it was good to see him have 2 hours to talk about his experiences and beliefs and be challenged on some of it. It's worth listening to if you have spare time, I like to listen to things while I am working.

If you can't be bothered, I will try and write up his reasoning later but I will have to rewatch some of it to make sure I am don't misrepresent him.

Yeah I watched a bit, but when his first question was why did he tweet about the starving man when he was leaving Gaza, instead of the shot children straight away, and then started looking at Chicago shooting stats I hought this is a little bit silly.

 

[Jazny]

Yeah I watched a bit, but when his first question was why did he tweet about the starving man when he was leaving Gaza, instead of the shot children straight away, and then started looking at Chicago shooting stats I hought this is a little bit silly.

This is all really terrible to talk and think about, but this is the ugliness or war. Those are fair questions, with fair answers. All I really cared about was the Dr Sidhwa's reasoning. I think the Dr seemed convincingly truthful in his testimony, I don't believe he made up seeing 13 shot children in 14 days. People who accuse him of fabricating x-rays and outright lying are idiots imo.

What was interesting was how he concluded that the shot children must have been deliberate. He acknowledges that he can't say if any of the 13 children he saw were shot deliberately or were war crimes. Instead he takes the total of the amount of children he and his colleagues working in other areas saw that were shot and makes an argument that this total amount of shot children is proof that the shootings must be a result of deliberate targeting.

In the Chicago line of questioning, Dr Sidhwa acknowledges there will be some amount of children being shot in a warzone unintentionally. He says: 'If anyone argues every child being shot in Gaza is deliberate that would be crazy'. So there is some baseline of shot children you would expect to see, but understandably he doesn't know what that baseline is, but he is assuming it must be significantly lower than what he and his colleagues saw. It would be good if there was more discussion on this point, because it gets to the core of his argument.

For some reason he speculates that he doubts that the Israeli government is ordering these shootings. He calls this idea "transparently stupid". He seems to be speculating that the shootings are reprisals from soldiers, but he acknowledges he has no way of knowing. He does argue in the open letter that the Israel government would be aware that large amounts of these children are being deliberately shot though (and I assume he thinks they are ignoring it or covering it up).

All this is not to say he is wrong. He might be right. But his argument isn't super convincing and its relies on a lot of speculation that is outside his area of expertise. Regardless, his evidence and testimony should be taken seriously and investigated further. I have no doubt war crimes are occurring, they occur in every war I think. What I doubt, and so does Dr Faroze for what's it's worth, is that this is an Israeli policy of targeting babies. He could be right that there are some amount of reprisal killings, it's definitely not impossible and would be surprising if there was absolutely no war crimes occurring at all from Israeli soldiers.

 

[manicpie]

Ali Khomeini is dead according to twitter but nothing official yet.

I ****ing hope so. One less psycho in the world

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

This is all really terrible to talk and think about, but this is the ugliness or war. Those are fair questions, with fair answers. All I really cared about was the Dr Sidhwa's reasoning. I think the Dr seemed convincingly truthful in his testimony, I don't believe he made up seeing 13 shot children in 14 days. People who accuse him of fabricating x-rays and outright lying are idiots imo.

What was interesting was how he concluded that the shot children must have been deliberate. He acknowledges that he can't say if any of the 13 children he saw were shot deliberately or were war crimes. Instead he takes the total of the amount of children he and his colleagues working in other areas saw that were shot and makes an argument that this total amount of shot children is proof that the shootings must be a result of deliberate targeting.

In the Chicago line of questioning, Dr Sidhwa acknowledges there will be some amount of children being shot in a warzone unintentionally. He says: 'If anyone argues every child being shot in Gaza is deliberate that would be crazy'. So there is some baseline of shot children you would expect to see, but understandably he doesn't know what that baseline is, but he is assuming it must be significantly lower than what he and his colleagues saw. It would be good if there was more discussion on this point, because it gets to the core of his argument.

For some reason he speculates that he doubts that the Israeli government is ordering these shootings. He calls this idea "transparently stupid". He seems to be speculating that the shootings are reprisals from soldiers, but he acknowledges he has no way of knowing. He does argue in the open letter that the Israel government would be aware that large amounts of these children are being deliberately shot though (and I assume he thinks they are ignoring it or covering it up).

All this is not to say he is wrong. He might be right. But his argument isn't super convincing and its relies on a lot of speculation that is outside his area of expertise. Regardless, his evidence and testimony should be taken seriously and investigated further. I have no doubt war crimes are occurring, they occur in every war I think. What I doubt, and so does Dr Faroze for what's it's worth, is that this is an Israeli policy of targeting babies. He could be right that there are some amount of reprisal killings, it's definitely not impossible and would be surprising if there was absolutely no war crimes occurring at all from Israeli soldiers.

What age is this about? To me a child is 12 and under. How many are teenagers eager to participate in the “resistance” and are handed a gun, then counted as “children” when they become casualties?

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

What age is this about? To me a child is 12 and under. How many are teenagers eager to participate in the “resistance” and are handed a gun, then counted as “children” when they become casualties?

You know nothing about it and you've already made your decision.

 

[Bostonian]

By Bostonians logic, October 7th is Israel's fault. They ****ed around in Palestine. It's "on them"

I'm fine with that.

I don't have much sympathy for anyone in that region. Stop following the teachings of some medieval weirdos warped ramblings and their lives might improve.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

*

This is all really terrible to talk and think about, but this is the ugliness or war. Those are fair questions, with fair answers. All I really cared about was the Drs reasoning. I think the Dr seemed convincing, I don't believe he made up his testimony of seeing 13 shot children in 14 days. People who accuse him of fabricating x-rays and outright lying are idiots.

Agreed.

What was interesting was how he concluded that the shot children must have been deliberate. He acknowledges that he can't say if any of the 13 children he saw were shot deliberately or were war crimes. Instead he takes the total of the amount of children he and his colleagues working in other areas saw that were shot and makes an argument that this total amount of shot children must be deliberate.

In the Chicago line of questioning, he acknowledges there will be some amount of children being shot in a warzone unintentionally. He says: 'If anyone argues every child being shot in Gaza is deliberate that would be crazy'. So there is some baseline of shot children you would expect to see, but understandably he doesn't know what that baseline is, but he is assuming it must be significantly lower than what he and his colleagues saw. It would be good if there was more discussion on this point, because it gets to the core of his argument.

Chicago is not a warzone. We're not attributing some of these to Gazan street crime, break and enters, bystanders caught up in gang related drive-bys.

The descriptions from his colleague whom he mentions, Dr Perlmutter, describe precision wounds to both head and heart. This doesn't happen accidentally. IDF and Hamas are not typically in gunfights with children present. These being victims of random gunfire is just not credible.

For some reason he speculates that he doubts that the Israeli government is ordering these shootings. He calls this idea "transparently stupid". He seems to be speculating they are reprisals from soldiers but acknowledges he has no way of knowing. He does argue in the open letter that the Israel government would be aware that large amounts of these children are being deliberately shot though (and I assume he thinks they are ignoring it or covering it up).

I doubt they give express orders to shoot children either. How is knowing and allowing it to happen any better than ordering it?

All this is not to say he is wrong. He might be right. But his argument isn't super convincing and its relies on a lot of speculation that is outside his area of expertise.

What's the speculation outside his expertise? What's the argument?

There are facts and what should be a pretty straightforward conclusion to be drawn from it.

Regardless, his evidence and testimony should be taken seriously and investigated further. I have no doubt war crimes are occurring, they occur in every war I think. What I doubt, and so does Dr Faroze for what's it's worth, is that this is an Israeli policy of targeting babies. He could be right that there are some amount of reprisal killings, it's definitely not impossible and would be surprising if there was absolutely no war crimes occurring at all from Israeli soldiers.

The problem is, it won't be investigated. We get the same spiel about the IDF being committed to mitigating blah blah.




Their government has expressed genocidal statements, we've seen IDF officers saying even worse, and they are letting this happen, day in day out. I don't think we need a written order from an IDF general to know this behaviour is tacitly approved.