Documentation of Israeli War Crimes 22


“In of the one gravest incidents since the beginning of operations, according to

several testimonies, on 4 January Israeli foot-soldiers evacuated approximately 110 Palestinians into a single-residence house in Zeitun (half of whom were children), warning them to stay indoors. Twenty-four hours later, Israeli forces shelled the home repeatedly, killing approximately thirty. Those who survived and were able, walked two kilometres to Salah Ed Din road before being transported to the hospital in civilian vehicles. Three children, the youngest of whom was five months old, died upon arrival at the hospital.”

[UN OCHA]

“The ICRC/PRCS team found four small children next to their dead mothers in one of the houses. They were too weak to stand up on their own. One man was also found alive, too weak to stand up. In all there were at least 12 corpses lying on mattresses.

In another house, the ICRC/PRCS rescue team found 15 other survivors of this attack including several wounded. In yet another house, they found an additional three corpses. Israeli soldiers posted at a military position some 80 meters away from this house ordered the rescue team to leave the area which they refused to do. There were several other positions of the Israel Defense Forces nearby as well as two tanks.

“This is a shocking incident,” said Pierre Wettach, the ICRC’s head of delegation for Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. “The Israeli military must have been aware of the situation but did not assist the wounded. Neither did they make it possible for us or the Palestine Red Crescent to assist the wounded.”…..

…The ICRC believes that in this instance the Israeli military failed to meet its obligation under international humanitarian law to care for and evacuate the wounded. It considers the delay in allowing rescue services access unacceptable”.

[International Committee of the Red Cross]


22 thoughts on “Documentation of Israeli War Crimes

  • spivver

    I noticed the presenters on the British Brainwashing Corporation's Breakfast show this morning referred to this crime as an 'incident'. It is not an 'incident', it is a war crime, so say so. I sincerely hope that those who authorised and perpetrated it are tried and punished accordingly.

  • Hatari

    What do think will happen to the British Citizens fighting for the Israeli Army when they return to Britain after a couple of hard weeks of Slaughtering in Gaza?

    Answers to you MP by Email Please.

    1.Detained by the anti Terrorist Police at Heathrow

    2.Rendered to Guantanamo or detained for 42 days at HMP

    3.Greeted as Heroes by Friends of Israel in Parliament

    4.Feted by the Finchley Women's Israel appreciation society.

    5.Tea with Gordon Brown at N0. 10

  • Sabretache

    I have been absent from the comments on recent posts because my anger and disgust at Israel is so intense that it is difficult to maintain rationality and add anything useful. I continue to monitor the high traffic UK political blogs but frankly that only makes matters worse. It is amazing the extent to which the Israeli State media operation manages to maintain its image as the victim amid the carnage being inflicted. Though perhaps not so surprising when the extent of Zionist ownership and involvement in Western mainstream media (especially the US) is considered.

    I may be wrong about this but, having read as much as anyone about the whole sorry and sordid history of Zionism in both mainstream and alternative media sources, something deep inside is telling me that this really does mark the beginning of the end for what is unarguably a deeply racist, apartheid State. I fervently hope so.

  • writerman

    A thought experiment. How would the Western media react, what would the consequences be, if Palestinian terrorists were slaughtering Israeli children and civilians in numbers comparable to the casualties the Palestinians are subject to in Gaza?

    Their would be massive and universal condemation and understanding as Israel began to carpet bomb Gaza and ethnically cleanse the West Bank of the remaining Palestinians. There would be absolutely no sympathy for them, they would be reaping what they had sown. They would be shown no mercy.

    What's wrong with the way we think? Why are we prepared to tolerate the extraordinary levels of violence aimed at the people of Gaza? Do we really believe that one of our precious lives is worth a hundred of theirs? If we mean this, doesn't this boldy declare that we are deeply, deeply, racist? People who think like this, what are they capable of doing next?

    What makes me very angry, apart from the slaughter of people who are almost defenceless faced with the destructive power of a well-equiped modern army, is that most people I meet are outraged by what's happening in Gaza and don't support Israel. Not only that they don't support our own government and politicians. Yet our own political class is virtually silent about the atrocities in Gaza.

    The truth is our politicians don't respresent the views or attitudes of the British people, or at least on level one could find in military dictatorship like Eygypt, yet we are supposed to be a democracy. The Eygyptian people have an excuse, they are facing guns and torture if they protest, what's our excuse?

    But of course we don't, like the Egyptians, we don't really live in a truly democratic society and the trappings of democracy are being eroded on a daily basis. Our political system is both unrepresentative, corrupt and decadent. Of course the UK isn't as bad as Egypt, because it doesn't have to be, not yet, that's around the corner, but in reality we are moving closer to a facist dictatorship faster than most people realise.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    On-the-ground, eye-witness report from Ewa Jasiewicz (the only foreign journalist in Gaza, as the Israelis have prevented foreign media access since the start of the genocide):
    http://www.counterpunch.org/ewa01082009.html

    As a physician and a human being, to me (and to billions of others) this situation amounts to genocide – how else would one describe it? As well as the perpetrator, the Israeli state, our government here in the UK bears a large part of the responsibility for what is happening right now in Gaza.

    We must hold individuals in this government directly responsible. We must hold the Cabinet and in particular Gordon Brown and David Milliband directly responsible.
    http://uruknet.info/?p=99999&l=x&size=1&hd=0

    British weapons manufacturers are directly responsible for genocide.

    We must hold individuals in this government directly responsible. We must hold the Cabinet and in particular Gordon Brown and David Milliband directly responsible.

    They are using white phosphorus and uranium shells on a civilian population and they have been given the green light to do this by the USA, Russia and the EU.

    We must hold individuals in this government directly responsible. We must hold the Cabinet and in particular, Gordon Brown and David Milliband directly responsible.

    I will not forget this genocide and nor will billions of others. The USA, the EU and Russia will not be forgiven.

  • Dirty Euro

    I think Israel is going too far. White phosporous firing at international relief agencies, schools. I hope Israel is not trying to force Palestinians out in ethnic cleasning.

    But I must point out Jews are the most left wing whities. Most white people voted for Mccain in the USA. Only the jews of all the whites voted for the supposed crypto muslim Obama, who was against war with Iraq.

    So people should not confuse Israeli elites with jews in general either in Israel or anywhere else.

    We do not know why Israel is doing this. Everyone talks about the "Jew lobby", or the "Israel Lobby", but what about the "americian lobby" in Israel. Is this war really helping Israel in long term peace.

    In the end long instability in the region is more helpful to a neocon American elities strategic goal of instablity in the middle east to fund american oil barons with high oil prices, and the continuation extremist middle east populations prepared to put up with american supported puppets.

    Maybe Israel is doing this for USA elites, rather the other way around.

    We always here about the Jew Lobby, but it is really just an American funded lobby claiming to be speaking for Israel. Do we know who they are really doing this for.

  • OrwellianUK

    Dirty Euro,

    I think the mistake most people make is to equate Zionism with being Jewish. The former is a political ideology, perpetrated by Elite interests whose atrocities past and present make it no exaggeration to equate it with Nazism.

    The latter of course is a Cultural/Religious identity that the former hides behind to deflect criticism of its policy. The term 'anti-semitism' is a frequent slur made by the proponents of Zionism, ironically misusing its historical context while disseminating racist ideology simultaneously.

    Many Jews of course, are not Zionists and I suspect some Zionists (or supporters) are not Jews. The anti-zionist movement among Jewish people is much bigger than the Israeli establishment will admit.

    I further suspect that many Israelis would think differently, if they were able to see what is really happening and had time to understand the history, see past the propaganda, and adjust to thinking uncoloured by the indoctrination they have no doubt had since birth.

    Even if they could not be persuaded to show a humane attitude in the light of the evidence, pragmatism should at least convince most that a belligerent policy is madness.

    There are some who believe that rather than Israel being controlled by the US, it is the other way around. There is evidence to support this – Ariel Sharon reportedly chastised Shimon Peres for worrying about what the US might think by telling him that it is Israel who controls the US. Furthermore the AIPAC lobby in the US is extremely influential.

    However, one way or another, this is essentially about Elite Power interests concerning hegemony and resources and normal people whether they be in the US, Gaza, Israel or anywhere else are considered irrelevant by these interests except to be used and manipulated, or expended as seen fit.

    Best regards.

  • amk

    "I think the mistake most people make is to equate Zionism with being Jewish. The former is a political ideology, perpetrated by Elite interests whose atrocities past and present make it no exaggeration to equate it with Nazism."

    While I agree with the rest of your post, I disagree that comparing Zionism with Nazism is accurate. Zionists have yet to systematically exterminate whole populations.

    Furthermore, the comparison will shock many "on the fence" and make them less likely to consider your arguments.

    A better comparison is with settler colonialism, such as Rhodesia, apartheid South Africa, or the early United States. This better reflects both the actions of Zionists, the situation they find themselves in – immigrants, outnumbered by the natives, but with superior firepower – and most likely their thought processes too.

    Juan Cole argues that Israel is a settler-colonial society, and that such societies lead to one of three ends:

    1) The expulsion of the colonists, as in Algeria;

    2) the integration of the colonists into a nation that includes the indigenous population, as happened in South Africa; or

    3) the expulsion of the indigenous population, as with the Trail of Tears in the nineteenth-century United States.

    Option 2) is the one-state solution Craig advocates.
    http://www.juancole.com/2009/01/un-ceasefire-call

    Here's a video of Christian Zionists I posted on another thread. These people believe recreating biblical Israel and war in the holy land will hasten the second coming of Jesus.
    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=mjMRgT5o-Ig

  • GJ Huisman

    I saw your speech at an anti-Israel demonstration and I must say, I've never heard so much hatred and lies in one single speech.

    I nominate Craig Murray for the Joseph Goebbels award. No, I state it differently: I nominate Joseph Goebbels postmortem for the Craig Murray Award.

    With the most disgust,

    GJ Huisman

    The Netherlands

  • OrwellianUK

    amk

    I don't care much for the complicit 'moderacy' of those on the 'fence'.

    If you research Zionist policy and violence you will discover that, other than the industrialised methods used by Hitler, the policy is largely the same.

    I have found nothing to refute the conclusion that the mentality of the Nazis and the Zionists is largely the same, and if those who drive this policy thought they could get away with a more 'industrial' tactic, they would undoubtedly do so. At the beginning of the current Gaza crisis, the Israeli defence minister promised the Palestinians their own 'Shoah'.

    Call it what you will – Genocide, Ethnic cleansing – the objective is the same: the systematic destruction of the Palestinian people, their culture, their society and their presence in Palestine.

    Read this article by John Pilger for some historical context:
    http://pilger.carlton.com/page.asp?partid=519

    Also note within this article the following quote:

    "Is it an irresponsible overstatement," asked Richard Falk, the United Nations Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and international law authority at Princeton University, "to associate the treatment of Palestinians with this criminalized Nazi record of collective atrocity? I think not."

    Falk is Jewish by the way.

    Furthermore, Israel is not a 'Settler Colonial' society. This is a rationalisation of Genocidal tactics by the perpetrator.

    An example of this is the Genocide of Native Americans with such tactics as destruction of their food supply (buffalo), the herding into 'Reservations' (open prisons, just like Gaza), where the land was so infertile that they could not possibly subsist without aid from their oppressor, the murder of women and children by smashing of heads with rifle butts to save bullets, and the 'donating' of blankets to reservation Indians which were known to be infected with Smallpox.

    All have been rationalised with the same arguments

  • OrwellianUK

    GJ Huisman,

    What exactly in Craig's speech would you constitute 'hatred and lies'? You gave no examples in your post.

    If you want hatred and lies, go to Melanie Phillips blog and articles in the Spectator. A torrent of propaganda and dehumanising rhetoric.

    By the way this was not an 'Anti-Israel' Demonstration but a peace demonstration. It is in the interests of saving lives, not inciting hatred for the taking of more lives. Or perhaps you are just uncomfortable with the truth about the State of Israel?

  • Craig

    G J Huisman,

    I have posted the speech on the blog now, so you can deconstruct it. You are entitled to a different opinion, but I should be interested to hear what you fell was a lie.

  • amk

    "I don't care much for the complicit 'moderacy' of those on the 'fence'."

    I care of bringing them off the fence and onto our side. Many will be simply ignorant of Israel's past. It's not like the media ever bring it up – as Craig says, that Sderot was once Palestinian is never mentioned.

    "Furthermore, Israel is not a 'Settler Colonial' society."

    Is too. Palestine has been colonised and settled.

    "This is a rationalisation of Genocidal tactics by the perpetrator."

    Eh? A rationalisation is a non-threatening false explanation masking a threatening true motivation, but no-one thinks settler colonialism is acceptable. It absolutely requires the dehumanisation of the natives and that atrocities be committed against them.

    I don't believe Zionism's purpose is "kill all the Palestinians", it's just that their existence obstructs "re-create biblical Israel".

    The USA was also a settler colonial society, but you are correct about its policy towards the natives. In the article I linked above Juan Cole refers to Algeria, another settler colonial situation.

  • OrwellianUK

    As far as the moderacy is concerned I have had several exchanges with journalists holding these 'moderate' stances and found them to be wilfully ignorant. Hence my lack of patience with it I regret to say.

    "Is too. Palestine has been colonised and settled"

    That seems to imply Palestine was empty to start with. You've forgotten about the little matter of massacres and forced expulsion. In the context of the manner in which the State of Israel was created, it is not a 'Settler Colonial' Society, but an invader. But then I was arguing that 'Settler Colonialism' is simply a Euphemism:

    "Eh? A rationalisation is a non-threatening false explanation masking a threatening true motivation, but no-one thinks settler colonialism is acceptable. It absolutely requires the dehumanisation of the natives and that atrocities be committed against them."

    Sounds like a non-threatening euphemism for Genocide to me. That's why I think it is a term or 'Rationalisation'. Because it sounds nicer – 'We settled and colonised' when in actual fact 'Took the land by force and slaughtered/drove into oblivion the native population' is more accurate. By this same measure, the Israelis are currently 'rationalising' the slaughter in Gaza with phrases like 'we have no choice' while not denying the act is taking place.

    A quote from Derek Jensen's 'Endgame'

    "Civilization is based on a clearly defined and widely accepted yet often unarticulated hierarchy. Violence done by those higher on the hierarchy to those lower is nearly always invisible, that is, unnoticed. When it is noticed, it is fully rationalized. Violence done by those lower on the hierarchy to those higher is unthinkable, and when it does occur is regarded with shock, horror, and the fetishization of the victims".

    "I don't believe Zionism's purpose is "kill all the Palestinians", it's just that their existence obstructs "re-create biblical Israel"."

    This sounds like a contradiction in terms – since if something existing is stopping your plans, then you are inclined to make it 'dis-exist'. Also, it is not necessary for an invader/occupier to kill all inhabitants for it to qualify as genocide. See this excerpt from Wikipedia:

    [i]While precise definition varies among genocide scholars, a legal definition is found in the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG). Article 2, of this convention defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.[/i]

    The above matches the Palestinians plight rather accurately.

    I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this particular point, but for my mind when something is so obvious, you call it what it is. It is only the relationship of the country in question to our own country that usually decides the terminology in the media. This is why Israel, an official ally, is never described as a 'Rogue' or 'Terrorist' State, even though it is, and why its Zionist policy is not compared to Nazism, even though it should be.

    regards

  • amk

    "As far as the moderacy is concerned I have had several exchanges with journalists holding these 'moderate' stances and found them to be wilfully ignorant. Hence my lack of patience with it I regret to say."

    The professional journalist's professional concept of "objectivity" is essentially an endorsement of the false mean fallacy. If ever a journo is faced with one man arguing passionately that 2+2=4 and another arguing passionately that 2+2=6, he will strive to imply that the reasonable position is that 2+2=5, and that both debaters are extremist. (Modified (AFAIK) "Englishman's Fallacy", penned by that Scots git Adam Smith.) This is also exploitable, as a particularly extreme person (Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh or even our very own Melanie Phillips) can pull the false mean around. This is Overton Window theory.

    I'm more concerned with the not very well informed general public, who tend to rely on professional journos for their information.

  • OrwellianUK

    Interesting concept the Overton Window.

    It seems to me the media attempt to keep this window very much in a fixed place.

    Hence Chomsky's 'Framework of discussion' in which a very narrow spectrum of views are allowed.

  • Steve

    Did you ever encounter a rabid animal ?

    Whatever you try, however you behave, it will savagely attack you.

    It's a truly disillusioning experience.

    There is no cure against rabies.

    The only way to stop a rabid animal is killing it.

    The state of Israel was born out of violence.

    It grew with more violence.

    And it will perish in a sea of violence.

    Inevitable.

Comments are closed.