Reports: Hamas shuts charity offices in Gaza

[ColesCountyDem]

Reports: Hamas shuts charity offices in Gaza

By the CNN Wire Staff
June 3, 2010 6:49 a.m. EDT

(CNN) -- The United Nations' special coordinator for Middle East peace expressed his concerns Thursday over reports of Hamas breaking into charity offices in Gaza and closing them down, a statement said.

"This targeting of NGOs, including UN partner organizations, is unacceptable, violating accepted norms of a free society and harming the Palestinian people," said Robert Serry, U.N. special coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process.

"The de facto authorities must cease such repressive steps and allow the re-opening of these civil society institutions without delay."

Some 80 percent of Gaza residents receive aid from NGOs -- nongovernmental organizations -- because tight import restrictions put in place by Israel since Hamas took full control of the Palestinian territory in 2007.

Israel considers Hamas a terrorist organization. Hamas does not recognize Israel's right to exist.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/06/03/gaza.un/index.html

[Chulanowa]

1. Insert facepalm here

Smooth move, dumbasses.

[EFerrari]

2. Careful. There's an info war on. Remember, "go back to Auschwitz"?

[Chulanowa]

10. Yeah, what's the word on that one?

I heard the recording and it struck me as very bizarre; especially at the end, "we're going against the US for the Arabs remember 9/11 guys"

Not making any judgments over the validity of it or anything, it just struck me as damned weird.

[EFerrari]

52. I'm just wondering why those vicious anti-semites aren't out in the media

with the rest of the survivors. Unless they're captives in an IDF studio.

[ColesCountyDem]

3. Somewhat strips away any shred of legitimacy from the 'humanitarian' angle on things, eh?

Of course, none of it will matter in the least to Hamas or their 'useful idiots' ....

[EFerrari]

4. Well, no, because the flotilla was not organized for Hamas

and was not for the benefit of Hamas.

That's just stupid.

[ColesCountyDem]

5. No, the flotilla was supposed to be all about more humanitarian aid.

The Palestinians in Gaza need SOOOOOOOOO much more than is being allowed in via the port of Ashdod, right?

[Ken Burch]

7. You can't hold the aid convoys responsible for what Hamas does.

And no, the fact that Hamas did this does not VINDICATE the Siege. The Siege is still an immoral act of collective punishment of a civilian population, and it still goes without saying that it will never weaken Hamas itself.

[EFerrari]

9. We don't know that Hamas even did this.

They may have but after this week, I'll wait for confirmation.

[Ken Burch]

12. Agreed, but I was talking about the general smear that the convoys are "tools of Hamas"

n/t.

[ColesCountyDem]

13. Why is it the very INSTANT anyone reports that Israel does anything, it's gospel, but...

... if Hamas does it, we must all prudently 'wait for confirmation'?

:eyes:

[Ken Burch]

19. Why is it that you believe ANYTHING the Israeli government says anymore?

Don't you get it that that government doesn't WANT the war to end OR the establishment, EVER, of a Palestinian state?

Don't you get it that that government doesn't give a damn about how many more ISRAELIS die in all of this?

Face facts...these days, the Israeli government is the ENEMY of the Jews.

[EFerrari]

23. Oh, gee, let's see. Because the Israeli nutwing government

is on a misinformation binge?

Ya think?

"Those life jackets were really bullet proof vests!" "See these knives we took out of the mess, they're WEAPONS!" "Three of our troops almost were taken hostage by those violent terrorists -- who got them out of the fighting and brought a doctor to them!"

Embarrassing.

[ColesCountyDem]

27. No, just an equal and opposite bias, and just as well-founded. n/t

[EFerrari]

53. Nope. Those are all claims made by the current wingnut Israeli government

during this, their week of nonstop embarrassment.

[ColesCountyDem]

61. As opposed to the terrorist group currently running Gaza, Hamas, do you mean? n/t

[ColesCountyDem]

11. Oh my god, it is NOT 'collective punishment'!

'Collective punishment' is shooting, hanging, raping, selling into prostitution, enslaving, etc., etc., etc. .

[Ken Burch]

14. Deprivation of food supplies, medicine and the ability to rebuild homes IS collective punishment

And as for your list, most of those happened in OCL.

There's no good reason for you to defend the brutality of the IDF or the blind, vindictive arrogance of Bibi. Both of those things are endangering Israel far more than any aid convoy ever could.

[ColesCountyDem]

18. Really?

Please post a citation from a legal authority that defines those things as 'collective punishment'.

[Chulanowa]

28. It's the Fourth Geneva Convention. Part 3 section II

[ColesCountyDem]

31. Really?

It's two words-- that's the entire sub-paragraph, no definition included. Check it yourself.

[Chulanowa]

35. So your argument has no basis

As the relevant law does not restrict the term "collective punishment" to the acts you claim it is restricted to, does it?

[ColesCountyDem]

45. Poor argument.

Look at the entire paragraph of which 'collective punishment' is a two-word sub-paragraph, and every action mentioned there is an act of violence against civilians. I seriously doubt it was thrown in there by accident if it was not meant, contextually, to mean ONLY acts of violence.

[Chulanowa]

49. Would you like to see the original text?

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/385ec082b509e76c41256739003e636d/6756482d86146898c125641e004aa3c5

Art. 33. No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

Pillage is prohibited.

Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited.

Helpfully, this page also offers commentaries on the various provisions. http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/COM/380-600038?OpenDocument

PARAGRAPH 1. -- PRINCIPLE OF INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY

1. ' Prohibition of collective penalties '

The first paragraph embodies in international law one of the general principles of domestic law, i.e. that penal liability is personal in character.
This paragraph then lays a prohibition on collective penalties. This does not refer to punishments inflicted under penal law, i.e. sentences pronounced by a court after due process of law, but penalties of any kind inflicted on persons or entire groups of persons, in defiance of the most elementary principles of humanity, for acts that these persons have not committed.
This provision is very clear. If it is compared with Article 50 Database 'IHL - Treaties & Comments', View '1.Traités \1.2. Par Article' of the Hague Regulations, it will be noted that that Article could be interpreted as not expressly ruling out the idea that the community might bear at least a passive responsibility (2).
Thus, a great step forward has been taken. Responsibility is personal and it will no longer be possible to inflict penalties on persons Who have themselves not committed the acts complained of.
Obviously, the belligerents will retain the right to punish individuals who have committed hostile acts, in accordance with Article 64 Database 'IHL - Treaties & Comments', View '1.Traités \1.2. Par Article' et sqq. concerning penal legislation and procedure, when it is a matter of safegarding their legitimate interests and security.


The commentaries page also offers a helpful link to the hague's take on the notion: http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/4e473c7bc8854f2ec12563f60039c738/b2d5c9bd27f0dc51c12563cd005168fb!OpenDocument

ANNEX TO THE CONVENTION : Regulations respecting the laws and customs of war on land #Section III : Military authority over the territory of the hostile state
Art. 50. No general penalty, pecuniary or otherwise, shall be inflicted upon the population on account of the acts of individuals for which they cannot be regarded as jointly and severally responsible.

========================

So what we have here, is you trying to wriggle what you really, really want to see, into a document that says nothing of the sort.

An Israel supporter that is also a liar. Damn. Now I've seen it all.

[ColesCountyDem]

62. Pillage is a crime of violence, just as I said.

Show me where it says a blockade is 'collective punishment'.

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ColesCountyDem]

72. Sorry, but it's a far better legal argument than that mushy-headed crap you post.

I am making a solid legal argument; just because it doesn't fit your world view doesn't mean it's invalid.

:eyes:

[Ian David]

40. "Ignored" won't have one. n/t

[ColesCountyDem]

47. Oh, I'm wounded! Medic! n/t

[Ian David]

51. No, not YOU. n/t

[ColesCountyDem]

64. Oh, OK. I misunderstood. n/t

:hi:

[Chulanowa]

69. We are the Judean People's Front crack suicide squad! Suicide squad, attack!

That showed 'em, huh?

[EFerrari]

15. The 48% of children under five who are anemic in Gaza disagree with you. n/t

[ColesCountyDem]

34. Ending the UN distribution of NGO humanitarian aid will really help them, won't it? n/t

[EFerrari]

55. There is no confirmation that this recycled story of yours is true.

Can you find some?

[ColesCountyDem]

60. There's NEVER any confirmation of ANYTHING negative about Hamas.

It beggars belief that people here can't believe ANYTHING negative about Hamas.

:eyes:

[Chulanowa]

20. Maybe you shouldn't argue about terms you don't know the definition of

Because... Damn. Right after a certain poster's demand for forced sterilization of Arab women, what you just said may be the dumbest thing i've seen on the I/P forum in a long while

[ColesCountyDem]

24. Maybe you ought to find a citation to a legal authority.

I'll save you time: you can't.

[Chulanowa]

32. Actually, you're the one who needs to provide proof

The Geneva conventions speak of collective punishment. Could you provide a source confirming that collective punishment is defined only by the terms you have chosen?

Than kyou ahead of time, sir.

[ColesCountyDem]

39. Actually, I said it was NOT defined.

It's included in a two-word sub-paragraph. That's the sole mention of the phrase in the entire Convention.

[Chulanowa]

50. So you're trying to give it a very specific definition of your own making

Disingenuous, at best.

Seriously? There are guys here on the I/P forums who are a whole lot better at this silly thing you're doing than you are. Maybe you should leave it up to the pros, and content yourself with cheering in the bleachers?

[ColesCountyDem]

63. No, thanks, I'll continue.

I thank you for your opinion, but you know what they say about opinions, don't you?

[Chulanowa]

68. Sure I do.

You sure seem intent on putting your opinion right up under people's noses lately. it's not even a very good opinion, and even flies in the face of documented fact.

This ain't Fox news, buddy. "Fact" and "opnion" are not interchangeable here.

[ColesCountyDem]

71. I wouldn't know about Fox News.

I only watch clips on TYT, TPM, etc. . They seem to have their heads up their asses, too.

[EFerrari]

37. Letter to Olmert: Stop the Blockade of Gaza

November 20, 2008
Dear Prime Minister Olmert,
We are writing to express our deep concern about Israel's continuing blockade of the Gaza Strip, a measure that is depriving its population of food, fuel, and basic services, and constitutes a form of collective punishment.


http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/11/20/letter-olmert-stop-blockade-gaza

[EFerrari]

8. The UN says Gaza gets less than a quarter of what it needs

and it is Israel's announced intention to put Gaza "on a diet".

Israeli easing of Gaza blockade painfully insufficient, senior UN official says

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=34455&Cr=palestin&Cr1=

[ColesCountyDem]

29. The UN also says Hamas is lobbing rockets into Israel.

Why is we're focusing ONLY on the things Israel does? lobbing rockets into Israel is a casus belli, or hadn't you heard?

[EFerrari]

44. You mean, why aren't people falling for your recycled distraction?

[ColesCountyDem]

48. No, I don't mean that.

But thanks for playing any way.

[Chulanowa]

56. You also seem to be disappointed that nobody fell for this one, either

Here's a tip I learned from the pros; Don't throw a "hey look over there!" distraction into your own thread.

You might wanna take notes.

[ColesCountyDem]

73. You might want to bone up on making solid legal arguments, too.

Your arguments here would be in tatters 10 minutes after you entered the courtroom.

[proteus_lives]

74. Hamas would take their aid and decide who gets it.

And they apparently have no problem with that.

[Ken Burch]

6. Nobody here is "pro-Hamas"

Supporting negotiations with them simply means you accept the reality that they'll HAVE to be negotiated with if the dispute is to end.

Enough slander already.

[ColesCountyDem]

16. Hard to do, when Hamas categorically refuses to negotiate-- ever. n/t

[Ken Burch]

22. They've been OFFERING to negotiate and even to accept Israel.

For now, that should be enough. They should not be required to unilaterally disarm PRIOR to negotiations and thus to leave the population of Gaza at the mercy of the IDF.

[EFerrari]

54. That's simply untrue. Geeze. You do your position no favors

when you repeat easily disproven baloney.


Hamas Chief Outlines Terms for Talks on Arab-Israeli Peace

By JAY SOLOMON and JULIEN BARNES-DACEY

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124899975954495435.html?mod=djemITP#printMode

[Ken Burch]

59. It's never a good sign when you find yourself telling the OTHER side in an argument

how to argue their case better, is it?

[ColesCountyDem]

65. No sadder than gullible people supporting known terrorist groups. n/t

[Ken Burch]

66. Said the supporter of the IDF.

:eyes:

[ColesCountyDem]

70. I surely did.

:eyes:

[Ken Burch]

76. The IDF is a military that every Palestinian can legitimately consider terrorist.

n/t.

[ColesCountyDem]

77. That's rather akin to saying that burglars' families consider police officers terrorists.

I'd bet almost every dollar I will ever have that if they quit supporting Hamas and helped hunt down the terrorist scum, Israel would lift their blockade....

[Ken Burch]

78. It's never been just about "Hamas".

It's been about denying self-determination to the Palestinian people. If Hamas were really the issue, the Israeli security and intelligence services wouldn't have spent so much time building Hamas up as an alternative to Fatah.

The Israeli government has GOT to accept two realities:

1)It does not have the right to dictate who Palestinians and Gazans should have as their leaders;

2)There will NEVER be any Palestinian leadership that accepts anything short of a state compromising all of the West Bank and Gaza, with East Jerusalem as its capital. Even accepting that as its state(which leaves 78% of Palestine under Israeli control)is a MASSIVE concession on the Palestinians' part.

[Ken Burch]

79. It's nothing at all like that.

And implying that everyone in Palestine is a terrorist or is related to one is, well, not much different than the old smear about who supposedly controlled the banks. Bigotry is wrong, period, and most Palestinians are just ordinary human beings trying to survive an oppressive situation they did nothing to deserve. Israel should have just given the Territories back a week after the Six Day War. They'd already made the point, and they knew the settlements would never be legitimate.

[ColesCountyDem]

80. I'm implying no such thing.

I used an analogy and, while it may have been less than perfect, I'm far from the only person in this forum who's done that. That said, my point is that the Palestinian people MUST reject and denounce the terrorist group, Hamas, and deny it any electoral legitimacy.

Put yourself in Israel's shoes for just a second, if you will, and ask yourself this: how would you feel (and react to) a political entity right on your border who is committed to terrorizing your population via rocket attacks, etc. ? Would you be charitably disposed toward either that entity OR to the people who support it?

It's an uncomfortable question, but one that must be addressed.

[Chulanowa]

17. Not at all

Hamas had zip to do with any humanitarian aid. According to this story, they're not helping the situation much, but that doesn't change the need for humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza.

The only useful idiots Hamas has are the people like yourself, who support policies that empower them.

[ColesCountyDem]

21. They are depriving the very people they govern of even MORE aid.

Isn't a light going on for anyone in regards to Hamas?

[EFerrari]

25. No, sorry, distraction fail. n/t

[ColesCountyDem]

30. No, reality check. pass. n/t

[azurnoir]

38. Check it out

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=316837

[EFerrari]

42. Surpise, suruprise. n/t

[azurnoir]

33. and once again is Hamas blocking all aid or just that which was stolen

from the flotilla ?

[Chulanowa]

43. That light's been on

Hamas is a bunch of assholes.

Unfortunately for both the people of gaza and the citizens of nearby israeli towns, Israeli policy strengthens Hamas and empowers it. Time and again, nation after nation, it has been shown that isolating and "containing" assholes in positions of leadership just makes things worse for everyone - except the assholes themselves. Saddam? Kim Jong Il?

[azurnoir]

26. and in other news

After demolitions, Gaza govt to build public housing

Following the demolition of 20 homes allegedly built illegally on public land in Gaza, the de facto government announced it would build housing units on land allocated for public use Sunday, in a bid to curb what officials describe as the illegal trade of public land.

De facto Planning Minister Muhammad Awad called on Gaza residents to reject all offers of land for sale put before them by illegal land traders, a statement from the Gaza Ministry of Planning read.

The announcement follows government claims that some 20 homes demolished in the southern Gaza Strip in May were illegally built on public lands. The demolition of the homes caused an outcry, and resulted in the comparison of the de facto government to Israel, in its policies of home evictions and demolitions targeting Palestinian citizens of Israel, and Jerusalem residents.

http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=290013

oh BTW this was already played in I/P

[azurnoir]

36. Seems you've run this story once before on I/P

guess you felt once was not enough

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=316837

[EFerrari]

41. Oh, brother. n/t

[Chulanowa]

46. Are you saying that he might have an agenda?

Perish the thought!

[lumpy]

57. Robert Serry claims there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

I believe he is close to Simon Perez and not to be trusted. Finding it very difficult to believe anything coming out of his mouth.

[activa8tr]

58. He's probably just watching Fox News!!! They keep saying it. n/t

[proteus_lives]

75. Unsurprising.

Hamas is a terror gang after all.