Israeli politician Livni hails Dubai Hamas killing

[cali]

Israeli opposition leader Tzipi Livni has applauded the controversial killing of a Hamas figure in a Dubai hotel by suspected Israeli agents.

"The fact that a terrorist was killed, and it doesn't matter if it was in Dubai or Gaza, is good news to those fighting terrorism," she said.

It is thought to be the first time a top Israeli has made such a comment.

Mahmoud al-Mabhouh was found dead in his room on 20 January, having been electrocuted and suffocated.

His alleged killers used fake British, Irish, German and French passports, according to the authorities in Dubai, which released pictures of the suspects, none of whom were caught.

<snip>

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8532009.stm

[Tripmann]

1. As I said in another thread

"The fact that a terrorist was killed, and it doesn't matter if it was in Dubai or Gaza, is good news to those fighting terrorism,"

....says the terrorists daughter, ignoring the Irony.

Livni's father was a terrorist (think her morther was too), the original IDF had its fair share of terrorists too, as has israels political class over the years.

A less hypocritical term for her to use might be 'enemy of israel'.

[Arctic Dave]

2. My thought too. It's not terrorism when we do it. n/t

[shira]

3. yes of course, killing Osama bin Laden is equivalent to Osama murdering children

:sarcasm:

[Arctic Dave]

4. Yes, because no one except osama has killed children for their ideology and greed.

[Tripmann]

5. Explain please shira....

[shira]

7. okay, is taking out Bin Laden just as bad as Bin Laden intentionally murdering children?

[Tripmann]

8. I meant can you expain how the comparison fits

with the daughter of a terrorist responsible for the deaths of many innocent people commenting positively on the execution of another terrorist. I'm failing to see the link.

[oberliner]

9. Is the child responsible for the actions of the parent?

If your father was a Republican does that mean you can't speak out against Republicans?

[shira]

10. yes, but only if that child is an Israeli/Zionist *nt*

[Tripmann]

11. So if she wasn't Israeli I wouldn't find her statement hypocritical, correct shira?

[shira]

12. her statement isn't hypocritical

I know you believe Israel is a terror state that deliberately invaded Gaza and ordered its mindless and evil troops to murder innocents but the facts don't bear that out.

[ConsAreLiars]

13. "Israel is a terror state that deliberately invaded Gaza and ordered its mindless and evil troops to

murder innocents"

Finally, you strung together a few words in a coherent sequence that are reality based. Congratulations.

Encapsulated within a deluded framework, as usual.

But maybe, if you can, try some realty checking. Israel was founded by terrorists, much like the US.

And different factions among them used terrorism against each other (much like the Palestinians who have yet to regain their state).

If you regard murdering innocents, including children, as evil, as I do, whether when done by Palestinians, or the 100's of times more done by Israelis, or 1000's times that done by the US, why do you keep trying to argue that murdering Palestinians, including 100's of children was not evil incarnate.

[Tripmann]

14. @Shira, I'm going to give you an opportunity to link to any comment I have made,,

,,,accusing Israel of ordering its troops to murder innocents.

Seems fair to give you the chance to prove you're not making unfounded accusations against me i.e. just shooting your mouth off.

[shira]

15. i thought you were in agreement with Goldstone's conclusions - guess I was wrong

[Violet_Crumble]

16. I've never seen you post anything like what Shira accused you of...

That was a patently ridiculous thing to accuse you of believing. I've been accused by the same poster of making antisemitic comments and being an anti-Zionist, amongst other things. All in all, it could be worse and instead of constantly getting it wrong about what DUers she disagrees with think, she could be giving me the wrong numbers for the Saturday night lotto draw ;)

[Tripmann]

17. Of course I haven't

In fact when shira accused me of the exact same thing before I exlained how she was wrong. So THIS time shes blatantly and knowingly making a false accusation against me.

Guess thats all shes got to bring to the discussion, surprise surprise.

[shira]

18. so both you and Violet disagree with Goldstone's conclusion about Israel's intent, correct?

Gee, all along I thought the two of you were right on board with his conclusions; that Israel didn't attack Gaza out of self-defense but rather to intentionally target, punish, kill/murder Gazan civilians.

That's why the 2 of you think Livni is a terrorist who should be tried for war crimes.

Is there some other explanation?

[Violet_Crumble]

19. Why are you yet again trying to go off on a tangent about Goldstone?

You made a very nasty and untrue accusation about Tripmann. You were asked by him to supply links to where he'd ever said anything of the sort, and instead you ignore what upi were asked to do and start going on about Goldstone. You've made false accusations about me in the past as well, and it gets really tiring to see you doing it to other posters as well...

I have NEVER said or thought that Livni is a terrorist, so please stop saying you know what I think. It's a very clumsy and immature 'debate' tactic and one that I'd hope the vast majority of those in this forum wouldn't stoop to...

[Tripmann]

20. So shira,

instead of providing any evidence whatsoever of what you accuse me of, you try to deflect the conversation by accusing me of two more things.

So, thats three accusations now. For the sake of any credibility you think you have around here, link to where I have stated ANY of the following that you accuse me of:

1. That israel intentionally targetted civilians during ocl

2. Where I state i'm 'right on board' with goldstones conclusions about punishing civilians

3. That I think Livni (I take it you're referring to Tzipi) is a terrorist who should be tried for war crimes.

Now, there ya go. 3 accusations made, back up any of them.

By the way violet, the answer is to derail the thread, as per usual, cause she can't rationally defend her position on most OP topics.

[shira]

21. so Tripmann, Violet...

I take it you both disagree with Goldstone's conclusions...

"While the Israeli Government has sought to portray its operations as essentially a response to rocket attacks in the exercise of its right to self-defence, the Mission considers the plan to have been directed, at least in part, at a different target: the people of Gaza as a whole.”<19>

At other points in the report, the language “at least in part” is dropped. Instead the report concludes that Israel’s “overall policy aimed at punishing the Gaza population” and that its “force was aimed not at the enemy,” but at “the civilian population.”<20> It found that Israel was guilty of “the direct targeting and arbitrary killing of Palestinian civilians” and that the killings “are the result of deliberate planning and policy decisions.”<21> “The Mission finds that the incident and patterns of events that are considered in this report have resulted from deliberate planning and policy decisions throughout the chain of command, down to the standard operating procedures and instructions given to the troops on the ground.”<22> “In every case the Israeli armed forces had carried out direct intentional strikes against civilians,” and the report considered that “the civilian population as such” was “the object of attacks,” rather than the collateral victims of military actions directed against combatants.<23>"

If you disagree with Goldstone, and I have no reason to believe either of you do since you've never hinted that you disagree with anything he reported, then I take my comments back and apologize.

If not, how was I wrong in my assessment? Goldstone clearly believes the Israeli high command (Livni, Olmert, Barak) are war criminals guilty of ordering the deliberate targeting and killing of civilians rather than ordering actions in self-defense primarily against the enemy. Goldstone says the primary target were civilians. If that's not charging Israel with intentional murder, then what is it?

Let's face it - you can't have it both ways. You can't say you support Goldstone's findings and then distance yourself from the worst of his accusations. If you agree with Goldstone, then my assessment of your views is correct. QED.

[Tripmann]

22. Take your time shira

Your accusations, your burden of proof.

Links to my comments that back up your accusations please........

[shira]

23. I'm not playing your game....you can't have it both ways. Read my post again. I'll wait.

[Violet_Crumble]

25. You made a bunch of ugly and untrue accusations. Put up or apologise...

You've been asked more than once now by more than one person to provide some links to Tripmann saying what you claim he believes. Yet again, you evade doing it and totally ignore what was said to you by both Tripmann and myself. What do you think you achieve by making false accusations against posters you disagree with in this forum? Do you think you have any credibility with most DUers who participate in this forum when you behave that way?

After the nonsense you've accused me of believing in the past, I'm not surprised that you'd now conjure up some crap that has me supposedly believing Livni is a terrorist, even though I've never said anything of the sort. Why make up something like that?

[Tripmann]

26. So, you qualifying any of the accusations you have made against me

is you 'playing my game'?

There you have it boys and girls, debate shira style.

Baseless accusations that she refuses to back up. If only us mere mortals had the guts to hide behind internet anonimity to commit defamation.

So, are you going to link to my comments that form the basis of your accusations?

[shira]

27. You both believe Goldstone's main accusation WRT Israel's intent but now deny it when pressed

Here's hoping at least one of you will face the music this time and not evade and obfuscate....

All the two of you have to do is distance yourself from Goldstone's main accusations (which to this date you both thoroughly agree with) and I'll gladly apologize.

Here they are again:


"While the Israeli Government has sought to portray its operations as essentially a response to rocket attacks in the exercise of its right to self-defence, the Mission considers the plan to have been directed, at least in part, at a different target: the people of Gaza as a whole.”<19>

At other points in the report, the language “at least in part” is dropped. Instead the report concludes that Israel’s “overall policy aimed at punishing the Gaza population” and that its “force was aimed not at the enemy,” but at “the civilian population.”<20> It found that Israel was guilty of “the direct targeting and arbitrary killing of Palestinian civilians” and that the killings “are the result of deliberate planning and policy decisions.”<21> “The Mission finds that the incident and patterns of events that are considered in this report have resulted from deliberate planning and policy decisions throughout the chain of command, down to the standard operating procedures and instructions given to the troops on the ground.”<22> “In every case the Israeli armed forces had carried out direct intentional strikes against civilians,” and the report considered that “the civilian population as such” was “the object of attacks,” rather than the collateral victims of military actions directed against combatants.<23>"

If you disagree, then you have my apologies.

Otherwise, I'm spot-on and you both know it and you're both being highly disingenuous about all this.

Both of you are playing games. Choose, b/c you can't have it both ways.

[Tripmann]

30. Your accusation, your burden of proof

Now back up your accuasations or apologise.

[azurnoir]

40. Yet more projection?

here is a direct quote from IDF on civilians in Gaza

The guiding principle of Israel's ground invasion is to move in with full force and try to minimize Israeli casualties, Israeli military correspondent Alex Fishman wrote in the daily Yediot Ahronoth. "We'll pay the international price later for the collateral damage and the anticipated civilian casualties," Fishman said."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=237283#237291

in other words we may not target them but we really are not too concernd, as to dealing later that seems your mission here Shira

[shira]

42. so Az, you agree with Goldstone and Ben White - correct?

And what I wrote in #12 here...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=302104&mesg_id=302197

That's basically your position, right? Close enough?

[azurnoir]

44. So are you trying to dodge yet again?

I gave no opinion nor is one needed IMO I pointed out what an IDF spokesman said

[shira]

45. nothing to dodge - you think that statement is strong evidence for Goldstone and White's views?

Seriously?

[azurnoir]

46. I was pointing out what IDF said nothing more nothing less n/t

[oberliner]

29. Question for you

Do you think that Israel deliberately targeted Gaza civilian sites?

I realize that is not the same as what the other poster accused you of, but I would be curious to hear your response if you are willing to provide one.

[Tripmann]

31. I'm always willing to provide one Oberliner

And I have provided the answer the shira before, which is why I called her on knowingly making a false accusation against me.

While I don't believe the primary goal of OCL was to target civilians, I DO believe Israel executed OCL knowing a large number of innocent women and children would be killed. To explain this I have even went as far as to provide the following analogy on at least a half dozen occasions:

If I go fishing with sticks of dynamite knowing that there are a large number of scuba divers under my boat, is the fact that my intention was to catch fish a legitimate defence?

Apologies for the semantics, but I take it you meant sites containing civilians.

[oberliner]

32. Thanks - sorry I missed your previous response to that question

I would suggest that in any military operation/invasion, there is an understanding that there are going to be innocent people killed.

Would you say that you "fishing with sticks of dynamite" analogy could apply to virtually any military conflict?

And to clarify, are you saying that you do not believe that Israel specifically and deliberately targeted civilian sites that were of no military value simply to kill or punish Palestinians?

Here is an excerpt from an editorial by Ben White in the Comment is Free portion of The Guardian's website:

"Diplomats and journalists are by and large shying away from the obvious, namely that Israel has been deliberately targeting Palestinian civilians and the very infrastructure of normal life, in order to – in the best colonial style – teach the natives a lesson."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/20/gaza-israelandthepalestinians

Is it fair to say that you do not agree with that assessment?

[Tripmann]

33. I always try to avoid the blanket statements

as they rarely convey the nuances involved in conflict.

Given that rockets launched from gaza had resulted in such a low number of deaths over a relatively long period of time (not that one death isn't one too many), it is not plausible that the threat to the state of israel was so great as to warrant OCL. So while you may suggest that any military operation, innocent people will be killed, the question is 'was OCL a necessary operation to protect a legitimate serious threat to the state of israel' that would warrant the unavoidable deaths of those wonen and children.

In relation to the civilian sites, to use the example of the flour mill, a full and independent investigation should take place. It is not acceptable, in light of conflicting evidence, for Israel to say 'we have investigated ourselves and we are innocent of targetting infrastructure.' Especially while they are actively stopping infrastructure from rebuilt and continuing the siege.

Theres something a little bit arrogant and transparent about claiming you didn't purposely deny sustenance while keeping a people under siege.

[Tripmann]

34. Still waiting for those quotes shira......

[shira]

35. Tripmann, you prove my point when you refuse to directly answer Oberliner's questions

You're unable or unwilling to show how your views differ from Goldstone or Ben White's. Therefore, what reason do I have to believe you think any differently than they do WRT Israeli intent?

QED.

[Tripmann]

36. Your accusation, your burden of proof

Given your very public accusations against me I have obviously supplied you with enough evidence to make your judgement.

Links or apology please.

[shira]

37. If you can't distance yourself from Goldstone or White's views, then I have you pegged correctly

and therefore, no apology needed.

How is your view on Israel's intent WRT Gazan civilians any different than the views held by Goldstone or White?

You should realize something's wrong with your views when you find you can never answer any direct questions with a direct answer. Either you're too embarassed or ashamed to answer directly. It shows you have something to hide. Why do you feel the need to hold to a position you cannot justify or are too ashamed and embarassed to admit?

[Tripmann]

38. You have made accusations against me

It is not up to me to prove or disprove those accusations, it is up to you.

What you are doing right now is acknowledging that you never had the information necessary to accuse me in the first place. You make the accusations then expect me to supply you with information to back those accusations up.

Is it not reasonable to assume that you already had that information prior to accusing me? If you have, please post it, if not then admit you have made accusations against me without any evidence to back them up, apologise, and move on.

[shira]

43. I base my thinking on what you've posted here in the past few months

And in the past few months, I see no reason to distinguish your POV regarding Israeli intent during OCL with the views of Goldstone or Ben White.

If you disagree with them, just say so and explain why. I'll gladly apologize once you make it clear your POV is different than theirs.

[Tripmann]

55. Great, now we're getting somewhere shira

Now that you've confirmed that you've based your accusations on what I've posted here in the past few months, you should be easily able to link to those posts to back up those accusations.

Can you get a move on please, its been a few days now and we don't want people thinking you make baseless accusations now, do we??

Tell you what, to help put you out of your misery, just prove 1 of the 3 accusations made against me by you , and we'll call it quits. Surely you can manage ONE??

[shira]

49. same to you as to Violet in post #48

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=302104&mesg_id=302577

[LeftishBrit]

41. I think that things are rarely simple...

Do I think that Israel targeted civilian sites in preference to military sites, or for fun, or out of pure sadism? No.

Do I think that they always took care to prevent harm to civilians if it might risk their military goals? No. Do I think that some people acted recklessly and immorally? Yes.

These are virtually inevitable consequences of war IMO. I would blame Israel far more for choosing to have OCL at all (inevitably unleashing harm to civilians) than for specific actions during the war, which are the consequences of that original decision.

I also think that as regards the self-defence argument: far more Israelis are killed on the roads than by terrorists, and a lot more Jewish lives could be saved by a major crackdown on dangerous driving: e.g. a mandatory ten-year sentence for anyone caught speeding. Israelis would not crack down to that extent, because they would consider, doubtless rightly, that it would be too great an infringement on civil liberties. This means that Israel will not do *anything* to save their citizens' lives, and therefore their treatment of Gaza cannot be justified purely in these terms.

Finally, I think that what America and the UK have unleashed in Iraq dwarfs the actions on either side of the I/P conflict, and that the left (and hopefully others!) *everywhere* should be uniting in a serious attempt to kill war before it kills us all

[LeftishBrit]

53. Just to clarify one sentence that could be misinterpreted

'This means that Israel will not do *anything* to save their citizens' lives' means 'They will not do *every possible* thing to save lives, e.g. when it might seriously clash with other values like their citizens' civil liberties'. I realize it could be misinterpreted as 'they never do anything at all to save their citizens' lives', which is of course untrue and not what I meant.

[shira]

54. it's understandable that people are against going to war, but the problem is...

...when Israel's actions are exaggerated, false accusations are made and reported as 'facts', etc. Worse is when the facts finally materialize, Israel's greatest detractors don't back down and admit they were misled, that they're wrong or that it's a big problem Israel is portrayed in a demonic manner. They persist in demonizing Israel and simply cannot or will not ever admit there's a problem with the way Israel is portrayed.

[Violet_Crumble]

24. Go back and read post #19

If it were anyone else but you, I'd suspect they just didn't see my post, but it's you, and you tend to blatantly ignore what others say to you. So pay attention this time:

Why are you yet again trying to go off on a tangent about Goldstone?
You made a very nasty and untrue accusation about Tripmann. You were asked by him to supply links to where he'd ever said anything of the sort, and instead you ignore what upi were asked to do and start going on about Goldstone. You've made false accusations about me in the past as well, and it gets really tiring to see you doing it to other posters as well...

I have NEVER said or thought that Livni is a terrorist, so please stop saying you know what I think. It's a very clumsy and immature 'debate' tactic and one that I'd hope the vast majority of those in this forum wouldn't stoop to...

[shira]

28. read post #27 to help me understand what you really think

Either you believe Goldstone and I am right about you or you don't believe Goldstone and I apologize.

You can't have it both ways.

[Violet_Crumble]

47. Again you didn't bother reading what I said to you....

Instead of totally ignoring what I say and instead saying the same weird thing over and over, pay attention to what's being said to you. Maybe this'll be third time lucky, though I doubt it...

Why are you yet again trying to go off on a tangent about Goldstone?
You made a very nasty and untrue accusation about Tripmann. You were asked by him to supply links to where he'd ever said anything of the sort, and instead you ignore what you were asked to do and start going on about Goldstone. You've made false accusations about me in the past as well, and it gets really tiring to see you doing it to other posters as well...

I have NEVER said or thought that Livni is a terrorist, so please stop saying you know what I think. It's a very clumsy and immature 'debate' tactic and one that I'd hope the vast majority of those in this forum wouldn't stoop to...

I've asked you this before and gotten no answer, but it's worth asking again. What do you hope to achieve by making totally false accusations against DUers you disagree with? Do you think it gives you some sort of credibility points? It doesn't. Do you think it makes people you don't agree with think yr someone who is really interested in a civilised and constructive discussion? Clearly it doesn't. Do you think the way you behave in this manner could explain why I for one like and/or respect quite a few 'supporters' of Israel in this forum, but don't feel that way about you?

And in case you think anyone's forgotten about the false accusations you made in this thread, here they are:

This is what you said to Tripmann: 'I know you believe Israel is a terror state that deliberately invaded Gaza and ordered its mindless and evil troops to murder innocents but the facts don't bear that out.'

And it was followed by another false accusation aimed at both me and Tripmann: 'That's why the 2 of you think Livni is a terrorist who should be tried for war crimes.'

I for one don't want an apology from someone like you. What I want is for you to stop making ugly and untrue accusations about other DUers...

[shira]

48. okay great, so you don't believe all that - fine, no more accusations then

What about what Ben White wrote here...

"Diplomats and journalists are by and large shying away from the obvious, namely that Israel has been deliberately targeting Palestinian civilians and the very infrastructure of normal life, in order to – in the best colonial style – teach the natives a lesson."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/20/gaza-israelandthepalestinians

Do you disagree with White?

[Violet_Crumble]

50. Glad it finally seems to have sunk in...n/t

[shira]

51. so no comment on Ben White's statement?

[Violet_Crumble]

52. Not to you, no... n/t

[Jefferson23]

6. Not surprising at all.

[Ken Burch]

39. Well, she would now, wouldn't she?

The Leader of the Opposition, in a parliamentary syatem(and in Israel especially), is usually incredibly timid about disagreeing with the government of the day on military or quasi-military actions, and would almost never do so in a time where the country was on an adrenaline rush over the "success of the mission". Plus, she'd have to be thinking that Bibi is going to call a snap election if he gets any kind of a polling bounce out of this(if for no other reason than to eliminate the need to have the pitiful, doomed remnant of the Labor Party that's being led into oblivion by Ehud Barak's ego as part of his coalition).

And Operation Cast Lead showed that Tzipi Livni has never advocated anything remotely like a humane, sensible foreign policy. This simply shows that a transition from a Likud to a Kadima government would be meaningless.