ah just another raghead loving, domestic terrorist liberal, spewing
his crap.

On Jan 10, 4:33 pm, "M.A. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Deliberate attacks on civilians that lack strict military necessity are war 
> crimes. Israel's current violations of international law extend a long 
> pattern of abuse of the rights of Gaza Palestinians. Eighty percent of Gaza's 
> 1.5 million residents are Palestinian refugees who were forced from their 
> homes or fled in fear of Jewish terrorist attacks in 1948. For 60 years, 
> Israel has denied the internationally recognized rights of Palestinian 
> refugees to return to their homes -- because they are not Jews."Israel Is 
> Committing War CrimesHamas's violations are no justification for Israel's 
> actions.OPINION
> JANUARY 10, 2009
> By GEORGE E. BISHARAT
> Israel's current assault on the Gaza Strip cannot be justified by 
> self-defense. Rather, it involves serious violations of international law, 
> including war crimes. Senior Israeli political and military leaders may bear 
> personal liability for their offenses, and they could be prosecuted by an 
> international tribunal, or by nations practicing universal jurisdiction over 
> grave international crimes. Hamas fighters have also violated the laws of 
> warfare, but their misdeeds do not justify Israel's acts.
> The United Nations charter preserved the customary right of a state to 
> retaliate against an "armed attack" from another state. The right has evolved 
> to cover nonstate actors operating beyond the borders of the state claiming 
> self-defense, and arguably would apply to Hamas. However, an armed attack 
> involves serious violations of the peace. Minor border skirmishes are common, 
> and if all were considered armed attacks, states could easily exploit them -- 
> as surrounding facts are often murky and unverifiable -- to launch wars of 
> aggression. That is exactly what Israel seems to be currently attempting.
> Israel had not suffered an "armed attack" immediately prior to its 
> bombardment of the Gaza Strip. Since firing the first Kassam rocket into 
> Israel in 2002, Hamas and other Palestinian groups have loosed thousands of 
> rockets and mortar shells into Israel, causing about two dozen Israeli deaths 
> and widespread fear. As indiscriminate attacks on civilians, these were war 
> crimes. During roughly the same period, Israeli forces killed about 2,700 
> Palestinians in Gaza by targeted killings, aerial bombings, in raids, etc., 
> according to the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem.
> But on June 19, 2008, Hamas and Israel commenced a six-month truce. Neither 
> side complied perfectly. Israel refused to substantially ease the suffocating 
> siege of Gaza imposed in June 2007. Hamas permitted sporadic rocket fire -- 
> typically after Israel killed or seized Hamas members in the West Bank, where 
> the truce did not apply. Either one or no Israelis were killed (reports 
> differ) by rockets in the half year leading up to the current attack.
> Israel then broke the truce on Nov. 4, raiding the Gaza Strip and killing a 
> Palestinian. Hamas retaliated with rocket fire; Israel then killed five more 
> Palestinians. In the following days, Hamas continued rocket fire -- yet still 
> no Israelis died. Israel cannot claim self-defense against this escalation, 
> because it was provoked by Israel's own violation.
> An armed attack that is not justified by self-defense is a war of aggression. 
> Under the Nuremberg Principles affirmed by U.N. Resolution 95, aggression is 
> a crime against peace.
> Israel has also failed to adequately discriminate between military and 
> nonmilitary targets. Israel's American-made F-16s and Apache helicopters have 
> destroyed mosques, the education and justice ministries, a university, 
> prisons, courts and police stations. These institutions were part of Gaza's 
> civilian infrastructure. And when nonmilitary institutions are targeted, 
> civilians die. Many killed in the last week were young police recruits with 
> no military roles. Civilian employees in the Hamas-led government deserve the 
> protections of international law like all others. Hamas's ideology -- which 
> employees may or may not share -- is abhorrent, but civilized nations do not 
> kill people merely for what they think.
> Deliberate attacks on civilians that lack strict military necessity are war 
> crimes. Israel's current violations of international law extend a long 
> pattern of abuse of the rights of Gaza Palestinians. Eighty percent of Gaza's 
> 1.5 million residents are Palestinian refugees who were forced from their 
> homes or fled in fear of Jewish terrorist attacks in 1948. For 60 years, 
> Israel has denied the internationally recognized rights of Palestinian 
> refugees to return to their homes -- because they are not Jews.
> Although Israel withdrew its settlers and soldiers from Gaza in 2005, it 
> continues to tightly regulate Gaza's coast, airspace and borders. Thus, 
> Israel remains an occupying power with a legal duty to protect Gaza's 
> civilian population. But Israel's 18-month siege of the Gaza Strip preceding 
> the current crisis violated this obligation egregiously. It brought economic 
> activity to a near standstill, left children hungry and malnourished, and 
> denied Palestinian students opportunities to study abroad.
> Israel should be held accountable for its crimes, and the U.S. should stop 
> abetting it with unconditional military and diplomatic support.Mr. Bisharat 
> is a professor at Hastings College of the Law in San 
> Francisco.http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123154826952369919.html?mod=djemEditorialPage
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to