Israel's Ethical Army: The Best People Is The IDF

[Batman]

December 10, 2002

Israeli soldiers visit LV during U.S. tour
By Ed Koch

LAS VEGAS SUN

American-born Israel Defense Force soldier Yoni Bedine passionately argues that when he and his comrades are hunting terrorists they try to avoid killing Palestinian civilians.

"Our moral values dictate to us not to kill innocent Palestinans," Sgt. Bedine said Monday prior to a Las Vegas speaking engagement.

"We know a large part of Palestinian society suffers, and whether their mainstream supports terrorism I do not know. But we do try to minimize their suffering while safeguarding the state of Israel."

Since the September 2000 uprising in his country, an estimated 1,700 Palestinians have been killed, as have 668 Israelis, Reuters News Agency reported this week. Also, more than 120 suicide bombers have attacked locations inside Israel in the last two years, according to published reports.

Bedine and four other young soldiers from Israel were at the Bellagio Monday night to speak to a crowd of about 800 at an event sponsored by the Jewish Federation of Las Vegas.

"We didn't want retired generals, but rather young, active soldiers to share their experiences," said Meyer Bodoff, executive vice president of the Jewish Federation of Las Vegas. "We wanted the community to hear their story."

Bedine, who celebrated his 25th birthday Monday, was born in Baltimore to a Zionist family and grew up in the United States.

He said he believes there is a misconception among Americans that Israeli soldiers fire at shadows in Palestinian neighborhoods and do not care if they accidentally shoot and kill innocent Palestinians.

On the website of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, for example, the 22-year-old national association of Arab-Americans paints a bleak picture of what life is like for Palestinian people confronted by Israeli soldiers.

"Both sides have committed acts of violence against unarmed non-combative civilians," according to the group's website. It alleges that "the violence committed by Israeli forces, however, is far greater than by Palestinians."

"Such acts must be condemned and halted," the Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee site says. "The UN and the international community should send peacekeeping forces to protect the civilian population."

Bedine, who has dual U.S. and Israeli citizenship, said he and fellow soldiers already do protect the civilian population, sometimes at the expense of the soldiers' safety.

"It would be so easy to safeguard ourselves -- to take out all possible threats -- but we don't do that," he said. "We don't shoot people who are just walking by. We respect human life."

Bedine said he was on guard duty one night near some caves frequented by Palestinian drug addicts. Although a noise was heard from the caves, the Israeli soldiers held their fire. Moments later, a spotlight shined on a suicide bomber coming from another direction who apparently panicked and blew himself up.

"If he had made it past our tank, he would have gotten to us," Bedine said, noting that such incidents are commonplace at Israeli posts.

Lt. Tori Shmueli, 22, who also spent some time in the United States as a youth, also said precautions are taken for civilians while hunting down terrorists.

"It is easier to use tanks in (Palestinian) neighborhoods but we choose not to use them and instead go door-to-door with (small) explosives to breach doors and walls," Shmueli said. "In some cases the lives of our soldiers are put at risk to spare Palestinian women and children."

Lt. Sivan Glazer, 21, a commander in the Israeli Navy, was promoted recently for her actions in North Gaza, when she alerted sharpshooters to two objects in dark night waters headed for shore. That action halted a terrorist attack.

"Israelis are afraid to go to the malls, but they are not afraid to go to the beach because incidents have been few and minor," she said. "There would have been hundreds of people on the beach the next morning. Terrorists could have been targeting our post or trying to kidnap them."

Before shooting the two advancing divers, Glazer ordered her troops to make sure the area was clear of possible civilians like Palestinian fishermen. After the incident, the bodies of the two divers with machine guns and a bag containing 40 grenades washed up on shore, Glazer said.

Bedine says Israeli troops are motivated by a desire that, whether there ever will be peace in the Middle East, the quality of life for Israeli citizens will improve with each passing generation.

"Jewish people have suffered throughout our entire existence," Bedine said. "I feel we are much luckier now than we have been in any generation before me.

"Things may or may not improve but we cannot allow frustration to lower our motivation or distort our perspective."

The Israeli soldiers will finish their 10-day tour of the United States with a speaking engagement in Palm Springs, Calif., this week, Bodoff said

[Jako]

And yet... Missiles fired at an Anglican CHAPEL! Absolutely no respect for the beliefs of ANYONE else. And people wonder why Israel is seen in a negative light by 90% of the planet.

Can you say "inappropriate use of force"? Wow.

http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/030123/w012382.html

Israeli helicopters fire missiles into Anglican hospital in Gaza

11:55 AM EST Jan 24
GAZA CITY (AP) - Israeli attack helicopters fired 11 missiles at Gaza City early Friday, hitting a chapel in a hospital and several workshops as tanks rolled into the city, after a Palestinian ambush on the West Bank of the Jordan River left three Israeli soldiers dead.

Witnesses said a missile scored a direct hit on an Anglican chapel in the Ahli Hospital compound in the centre of Gaza City, damaging the roof. Palestinians said the other missiles were aimed at workshops and six people were wounded.

The Israeli military would say only an operation was in progress. In the past, Israeli forces have targeted workshops in Gaza, charging Palestinians use them to make weapons, including mortars and rockets. Late Thursday, a rocket fired from Gaza exploded in a village inside Israel, causing no damage or casualties.

The violence came just five days before Israel's elections, where Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who is running for re-election with a policy of harsh military reprisals against Palestinians following violent incidents, is favoured over his opponent, Amram Mitzna, who favours negotiations with the Palestinians and withdrawal from most of the West Bank and all of the Gaza Strip.

In the past, Palestinian attacks on the eve of Israeli elections have helped hard-line parties like Sharon's Likud, galvanizing Israeli fears of terror attacks and desires for reprisals.

About 450 Israeli settlers live in three enclaves in the middle of Hebron, making it a flashpoint for violence. Sharon said Israel cannot give up the hotly disputed holy site in Hebron - the Tomb of the Patriarchs, where the biblical Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are buried - while Mitzna favours withdrawal.

The violent Islamic Hamas took responsibility for the ambush, issuing a leaflet saying the shooting was retaliation for attacks by Israeli settlers and the military against Palestinians and their property in Hebron, known as a Hamas stronghold.

Zvi Katsover, mayor of the nearby Israeli settlement Kiryat Arba, said earlier, soldiers were firing flares in the air to find armed Palestinians.

"This was apparently the unit that was chasing the terrorists and engaged them and the results are known," he told Israeli TV.

Tensions have been high in Hebron since Nov. 16, when 12 Israeli soldiers and guards were killed in a night ambush. The attack prompted the Israeli army to take over the Palestinian-controlled section of the city.

Last Friday, Palestinians shot and killed an Israeli settler in a house just outside Hebron.

[Mediocrates]

Did you read past the second paragraph of your own article?

[minusthejihad]

It's too bad you didn't volunteer and wind up in there as well.

[Jako]

Mediocrates: Yeah, I read the whole article actually, not sure what you're implying. Here, let me prove I actually understood it too.

The violence came just five days before Israel's elections, where Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who is running for re-election with a policy of harsh military reprisals against Palestinians following violent incidents, is favoured over his opponent, Amram Mitzna, who favours negotiations with the Palestinians and withdrawal from most of the West Bank and all of the Gaza Strip.

What this means to me is that Israeli voters favor violence and bloodshed vs the Palestinians as opposed to negotiations (or at least that is how the reporter states it).

About 450 Israeli settlers live in three enclaves in the middle of Hebron, making it a flashpoint for violence.

What this tells me is there are a small pocket of ILLEGAL settlers surrounded by Palestinians, obviously not an ideal situation, but it would be fixed if the illegal settlers were to move out (all these settlements are contrary to United Nations resolutions condemning the expansion of illegal settlements). Did I mention these settlements are illegal? Oh, they are.

Tensions have been high in Hebron since Nov. 16, when 12 Israeli soldiers and guards were killed in a night ambush. The attack prompted the Israeli army to take over the Palestinian-controlled section of the city.

What this tells me is that those Israelis killed were actually soldiers and guards. An occupying force. Of course they shouldn't have been killed, but the retaliation is not against a MILITARY target, but a civilian one. Again the disproportionate use of violence.

MinustheJihad:

It's too bad you didn't volunteer and wind up in there as well.

You are upset because you know what I say is true, so I forgive your misdirected anger.

Jako

[Mediocrates]

>What this tells me is that those Israelis killed were actually soldiers and guards. An occupying force. Of course they shouldn't have been killed, but the retaliation is not against a MILITARY target, but a civilian one. Again the disproportionate use of violence


Those people were off duty and working private security to secure a passage for civilians on their way to prayer. A passage by the way which was guaranteed by Arafat at Oslo per leaving the Tomb of Joseph a neutral zone.

[minusthejihad]

Yeah, that's it Jako. Brilliant assumption. Maybe I'm upset because:

1. You assume that Israelis favor bloodshed and violence rather than negotiate with terrorists. OK

2. You assume that these Israelis are settlers, when in fact they are simply Israelis that live in one the holiest places in Judaism.

3. You assume that the IDF targets civilians, even though terrorists hide behind human shields and in civilian areas like mosques, churchs, and hospitals because they have nowhere left to go and they know that Israel will be less likely to attack them. However, this attack showed that they are running out of spaces to hide.

4. You are the #x terrorist apoloigist and #y self-hating Jew (though not really a Jew anyway) to come on this board and scream, "bloody murder, massacre, occupation" and think we'll all start crying and writing our families in Israel, telling them to give the terrorists what they want and to kill them.

Could be all of the above, or it could be that I think you don't know about nothing, nor your head from you a**. You take a guess.

[JustPat]

Jako:

Perhaps you would like to explain what Israel is to do with the terrorists who hide in churches, monasteries, hospitals and under the skirts of terrified innocents to keep the IDF at bay? It is not Israel putting innocents in harms way. Since you seem sympathetic to the terrorist side, what is the proper solution? Should extortion, black mail, and terrorism be rewarded or punished?

[keren7]

[QUOTE]

Originally posted by Jako
[B]And yet... Missiles fired at an Anglican CHAPEL! Absolutely no respect for the beliefs of ANYONE else. And people wonder why Israel is seen in a negative light by 90% of the planet.

Can you say "inappropriate use of force"? Wow.

Oh no, don't say, IDF shot at an Anglican church? absolutely no respect for the beliefs of ANYONE else? are you with us on this earth or you just recently fell of some remote planet?!

Must I remind you the Passover massacre, must I remind you that every holiday we are on high alert because of your stupid pals who are trying to kill as many Israelis as possible on Jewish holidays? have you not heard that on several occasions such as last Friday, they continuously kill people on Sabbath? yet you shed crocodile tears because of the Anglican church. I'll tell you what, if the pals stopped hiding among church people, the churches would be much safer.

[Mediocrates]

I don't think anyone debates that. I think this goes back to that old double standard, the one where the IDF is held to an imaginary standard of angels and the PLO is held the soft bigotry of low expectations; "it's all they can do, what can you expect."

[keren7]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
I don't think anyone debates that. I think this goes back to that old double standard, the one where the IDF is held to an imaginary standard of angels and the PLO is held the soft bigotry of low expectations; "it's all they can do, what can you expect."

Read this, it is so sad:

"Slain soldier planned own funeral
By MARGOT DUDKEVITCH



The three soldiers of the Lavi Battalion killed in a terrorist ambush on Thursday near the Kevassim junction south of Hebron were identified over the weekend as St.-Sgt. Ya'acov (Kobi) Naim, 20, of Kfar Monash, Cpl. Assaf Bitan, 19, of Afula, and Cpl. Ronald Berer, 20, of Rehovot.

Naim was buried on Friday afternoon in the military section of the cemetery in his moshav. Bitan's funeral will take place at 1 p.m. Sunday in the Afula Military Cemetery, while that of Berer will take place at the same time at the Rehovot Military Cemetery.

Prior to his enlistment, Naim had told his sister that he feared he would not survive and described to her how he wanted to be laid to rest.

Naim's family and friends respected his wishes at the Friday funeral. They came to the cemetery in festive clothing carrying white balloons and ended the funeral by singing the Frank Sinatra song, "My Way."

Naim, who was raised in Ma'aleh Ephraim and later moved to Kfar Monash with his family, dreamed of traveling to Australia. He served in the Givati Brigade and several months ago completed a sergeant's course and signed up for an army career. Friends and relatives described him as a happy person.

He is survived by his parents, Rahel and Aharon, and two sisters.

[Blueprint]

(all these settlements are contrary to United Nations resolutions condemning the expansion of illegal settlements).

Wow, U.N resolutions! Yippy! Since you are such a fan of U.N and human rights, I wonder what you think of Libya's appointment to the head of the Human Rights commission. The U.N is basically irrelevant. I don't think you can even pretend that any group who declares that Zionisim is Racism and colonial expansion and occupation can be fair to Israel. And of course, you'll come back and say that the resolution was repealed, as if that was the only thing that the U.N ever acted unfairly to Israel on.

I don't think Israel really cares wehther they are contrary to any U.N resolution. As Abba Eban said:

"If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions.”

Can you guess who is the only U.N member who can not sit on the security council? Would you like to venture a guess?

Read this.

What this tells me is that those Israelis killed were actually soldiers and guards.

By your standards, the bombing at the Meggido Junction a few months ago in Israel was an attack on the military. But it was not. It was a bombing that happened to kill off-duty reservists. If you blow up random spots in Israel, trying to kill as many people as possible, you are bound to kill a large amount of soldiers. Your rhetoric reeks of the nutty Hamas claims that it's okay to kill Israelis because many of them are soldiers, or are related to soldiers, or will become soldiers when they reach 18.

Did I mention these settlements are illegal? Oh, they are.

I'm going to do the forbidden and copy and paste rather than write it in my own words.

Those who maintain that the settlements are illegal rely on Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, August 12, 1949, which states:

Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the occupying power or to that of any other country…are prohibited…

and in the sixth paragraph:

The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.

They interpret this to be applicable to Israel’s settlement of the West Bank and Gaza, understanding Israel to have become a “belligerent occupant” of this territory through entry by its armed forces.

Those who argue that the settlements are legal point out that the Geneva Convention does not even apply to the West Bank or Gaza, for, under its Article 2, the Convention pertains only to “cases of…occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party” by another such party. The West Bank and Gaza were never the territory of a High Contracting Party; the occupation after 1948 by Jordan and Egypt was illegal and neither country ever had lawful or recognized sovereignty. The last legal sovereignty over the territories was that of the League of Nations Palestine Mandate, which stipulated the right of the Jewish people to settle in the whole of the Mandated territory. According to Article 6 of the Mandate, “close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands not required for public use” was to be encouraged. (Article 25 allowed the League Council to temporarily postpone the Jewish right to settle in what is now Jordan, if conditions were not amenable.) Article 80 of the U.N. Charter preserved this Jewish right to settlement by specifying that:

nothing in the [United Nations] Charter shall be construed ... to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or peoples or the terms of existing international instruments.

Furthermore, even if the Geneva Convention did apply, it still would not outlaw Israeli settlements, since the relevant Article 49 was intended to outlaw the Nazi practice of forcibly transporting populations into or out of occupied territories to death and work camps, and cannot be applied to Israel because Israelis were not forcibly transferred. More than a year after Israel gained control of the territories as the result of an act of self-defense in 1967, Jews moved there of their own volition because of the historical and religious connection they felt, in some places reestablishing Jewish communities that had been destroyed in 1948 by Arab aggression. Arabs continue to live in these territories and their population continues to grow rapidly.

The U.S. government, as well as others, presently hold the view that the settlements are not illegal and that the extent of Israeli withdrawal from the territories is subject to negotiation. The Carter administration had held that settlements were illegal, relying on the opinion of its legal advisor Herbert Hansell, who in turn quoted the prominent authority on jurisprudence and international law, Professor Julius Stone, from his 1959 analysis “Legal Controls of International Conflict.” It is noteworthy, however, that in writing about the legal aspects of the Arab-Israeli conflict in 1980, Professor Stone maintained that the effort to designate Israeli settlements as illegal was, in fact, a “subversion. . . of basic international law principles.”

The Reagan administration and subsequent administrations reversed Carter’s position, with the opinion that while it disapproved of building new settlements in the disputed territories before negotiations, settlements are not illegal.

Former U.S. Undersecretary of State Eugene Rostow wrote several articles presenting the case why the settlements are legal and arguing that United Nations Resolution 242 stipulates that Israel withdraw from some of the disputed territory, but not necessarily all. It should be remembered that Rostow was one of the drafters of Resolution 242, the very resolution relied upon by Palestinians and their supporters to demand Israel’s complete withdrawal from all of the West Bank and Gaza and the dismantlement of all of the Jewish settlements.

Proponents of the view that settlements are illegal also often cite numerous U.N. resolutions criticizing Israel’s presence in the West Bank and Gaza, as if these General Assembly resolutions had any legal weight. They do not, even if one ignores the U.N.’s long, deplorable history of bias against Israel evidenced by the infamous “Zionism is Racism” resolution. Backed by a pro-Arab majority, special U.N. bodies have been set up exclusively to report on Israel’s practices—for example, the “Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People” and the “Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People,” which continue to pass partisan, anti-Israel resolutions.

Although the United States abstains or votes against Security Council resolutions unfairly condemning Israel, under former President Carter the United States initially voted for U.N. Security Council Resolution 465 which was passed on March 1, 1980. This resolution stating that Israeli settlements in the territories have no “legal validity” is often quoted to bolster the “illegality of settlements” argument. However, the American vote for this resolution was subsequently retracted, with the United States claiming that it had intended to abstain and blaming a communications failure as responsible for the vote. Finally, although Article 25 of the U.N. Charter says: “The Members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the present Charter,” this cannot invalidate Article 80 which says that:

nothing in the [U.N.] Charter shall be construed . . . to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or peoples or the terms of existing international instruments.

[JustPat]

Originally posted by keren7
I'll tell you what, if the pals stopped hiding among church people, the churches would be much safer.

A hearty AMEN! But if the Church people would quit hiding the Pals ...

Many of those so-called Christians stand shoulder to shoulder with the Palestinians in their bigotry. Will the real Christians please stand up!

[Jako]

Mediocrates: "Those people were off duty and working private security to secure a passage for civilians on their way to prayer. A passage by the way which was guaranteed by Arafat at Oslo per leaving the Tomb of Joseph a neutral zone."

An off-duty Army regular carrying a firearm "escorting" civilians through the occupied territories is NO CIVILIAN, sorry. And as for any guarantees by Arafat in the Oslo Accord, don't make me laugh. Israel picks and chooses which agreements suit them, which ain't the way it works.

Minusthejihad: "1. You assume that Israelis favor bloodshed and violence rather than negotiate with terrorists. OK

I'll assume that if Sharon wins the election, since it seems to be the main difference between him and the other candidate's platform.

2. You assume that these Israelis are settlers, when in fact they are simply Israelis that live in one the holiest places in Judaism.

I always add "illegal" to the word settler, but yeah, I assume that if an Israeli is in the Occupied Territories, they are either IDF or settlers. I am sure that there are a few Israeli Jews living in Palestine, but not many that are not settlers.


3. You assume that the IDF targets civilians, even though terrorists hide behind human shields and in civilian areas like mosques, churchs, and hospitals because they have nowhere left to go and they know that Israel will be less likely to attack them. However, this attack showed that they are running out of spaces to hide.

I love this "human shield" conversation. Here's a good link for you from Human Rights Watch:

http://www.hrw.org/press/2002/05/israel0509.htm

(Jerusalem, May 10, 2002) The Israel Defense Forces' (IDF) decision to prohibit the use of Palestinian civilians as "human shields" during military operations is an important step forward toward complying with the requirements of international humanitarian law, Human Rights Watch said today. ... The Israeli army has taken an important step towards respecting the laws of war," said Hanny Megally, executive director of the Middle East and North Africa division of Human Rights Watch. "But there are many other Israeli army practices that similarly violate international standards and require the same unequivocal and immediate action."

Notice they have taken a "step towards respecting the laws of war". We can only hope for more steps...

4. You are the #x terrorist apoloigist and #y self-hating Jew (though not really a Jew anyway) to come on this board and scream, "bloody murder, massacre, occupation" and think we'll all start crying and writing our families in Israel, telling them to give the terrorists what they want and to kill them.

Could be all of the above, or it could be that I think you don't know about nothing, nor your head from you a**. You take a guess."

Do I think you'll cry and start writing your family, no. Funny that you should come up with the suggestion, though, it might help. And what the "terrorists" want is FREEDOM and their own NATION, so maybe you SHOULD give them what they want. It's your basic human freedoms (Jews should know a lot about the terrible effects of ghettos on a people).

JustPat: "Perhaps you would like to explain what Israel is to do with the terrorists who hide in churches, monasteries, hospitals and under the skirts of terrified innocents to keep the IDF at bay? It is not Israel putting innocents in harms way. Since you seem sympathetic to the terrorist side, what is the proper solution? Should extortion, black mail, and terrorism be rewarded or punished?"

First off, I am not sympathetic to the terrorists, I am sympathetic to Palestinians. All Palestinians are not terrorists. And it IS Israel putting innocents in harm's way. It's called Occupation, and it has to do with cramming millions of people into a tiny land mass with hardly any human rights, government or hope and then killing and bulldozing them until they explode in anger.

The proper solution is dialogue. Pure and simple. No propaganda, no politicians, no hidden agendas. (Easier said than done, I know, but that's what I think the solution is)

keren7: "Must I remind you the Passover massacre, must I remind you that every holiday we are on high alert because of your stupid pals who are trying to kill as many Israelis as possible on Jewish holidays? have you not heard that on several occasions such as last Friday, they continuously kill people on Sabbath? yet you shed crocodile tears because of the Anglican church. I'll tell you what, if the pals stopped hiding among church people, the churches would be much safer."

Um, EVERY PALESTINIAN IS NOT A TERRORIST. Careful, your racism and ignorance are showing.

Blueprint: " I don't think you can even pretend that any group who declares that Zionisim is Racism and colonial expansion and occupation can be fair to Israel."

Um, what is Zionism then? Just trying to take care of my fellow Jews and get rid of these dirty Gentiles? Zionism is racism, colonial expansion and occupation, so well said.

"And of course, you'll come back and say that the resolution was repealed, as if that was the only thing that the U.N ever acted unfairly to Israel on."

Why stop at the UN? Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, even Bishop Desmond Tutu have harshly criticized Israel's policies, and Israelis always scream "Anti-Semite" about it. If I criticize Zionism am I an anti-Semite?

And as for all your great quotes on the non-Occupation, how's about some info from the UN on it, let's go way back to 1993.

http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Hurid...6?Opendocument

Taking into consideration the provisions of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and the provisions of Additional Protocol I thereto, and The Hague Convention IV of 1907, as well as the principles of international law affirmed by the General Assembly in its resolutions 3 (I) of 13 February 1946, 95 (I) of 11 December 1946, 260 A (III) of 9 December 1948 and 2391 (XXIII) of 26 November 1968,

Recalling the relevant Security Council resolutions, in particular resolutions 252 (1968) of 25 May 1968, 267 (1969) of 3 July 1969, 298 (1971) of 25 September 1971, 446 (1979) of 22 March 1979, 465 (1980) of 1 March 1980, 471 (1980) of 5 June 1980, 476 (1980) of 30 June 1980, 478 (1980) of 20 August 1980, 605 (1987) of 22 December 1987, 607 (1988) of 5 January 1988, 608 (1988) of 14 January 1988, 636 (1989) of 6 July 1989, 641 (1989) of 30 August 1989, 672 (1990) of 12 October 1990, 694 (1991) of 24 May 1991, 726 (1992) of 6 January 1992 and 799 (1992) of 18 December 1992,

1. Condemns the policies and practices of Israel, which violate the human rights of the Palestinian people in the Palestinian territory occupied by Israel with military force, including Jerusalem, and, in particular, the opening of fire by the Israeli army and settlers on Palestinian civilians that results in killing and wounding them, as has happened continuously since the eruption of the Palestinian people's intifada against the Israeli military occupation; the imposition of restrictive economic measures; the demolition of houses; the expropriation of houses; the ransacking of property belonging individually or collectively to private persons; collective punishment; arbitrary and administrative detention of thousands of Palestinians; the confiscation of property of Palestinians, including their bank accounts; the expropriation of land; the prevention of travel; the closure of universities and schools; the perpetration of crimes of torture in Israeli prisons and detention centres; and the establishment of Jewish settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory;

2. Affirms the right of the Palestinian people to resist the Israeli occupation by all means, in accordance with the relevant United Nations resolutions, consistent with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, as has been expressed by the Palestinian people in their brave intifada since December 1987, in legitimate resistance against the Israeli military occupation;

3. Calls once more upon Israel, the occupying Power, to desist from all forms of violation of human rights in the Palestinian and other occupied Arab territories and to respect the bases of international law, the principles of international humanitarian law, and its commitments to the provisions of the Charter and resolutions of the United Nations;

Not even specifically mentioning cities like Occupied East Jerusalem, which the Israeli government illegally annexed in 1980.

And here's another telling link for you:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2689039.stm

A disproportionate amount of the Israeli Government's budget has been spent on Jewish settlements in Palestinian territories, a report claims.
Peace Now - which tracks Jewish settlement activity - says 2.2bn shekels ($450m) from the 2001 budget were spent on settlements in the West Bank.
More than 200,000 Israelis live in communities in Palestinian territories in the West Bank and Gaza. The settlements are illegal under international law

All good stuff. None of it Anti-Semitic, but then again I'm not the expert.



Jako
sorry for the long post

[Mediocrates]

No that's ok, it no less unreadable than your short ones.

An off-duty Army regular carrying a firearm "escorting" civilians through the occupied territories is NO CIVILIAN, sorry. And as for any guarantees by Arafat in the Oslo Accord, don't make me laugh. Israel picks and chooses which agreements suit them, which ain't the way it works.



So it's suicide for the Jews is it. Ok well that sort of makes sense from your perspective. The only good Israeli is a dead Israeli.

The only terrorism is Jewish terrorism. I hear you loud and clear.