Palestinian journo confirms what the world ignores -- that Hamas uses civilians as human shields

"Hafez Al-Barghouti"

May he rest in peace. For surely he's marked for death by hamas now...

I second lorfalcon's comment. However, I will add that "May he rest in pieces" as that is far more likely after his statement.

This is just Fatah (PLO) propaghanda. Everyone knows Hamas drags children to safety. Let's be fair.

What do you think is the difference between Israeli soldiers and Hamas soldiers using human shields?

Israeli soldiers have been taped and found to have been using human sheilds on at least three separate occassions. The youngest reportedly being an 11 year old girl.

I see the two as having totally different motivations, but am curious to know what thoughts others might have.

Toward the Right

You wrote, "Israeli soldiers have been taped and found to have been using human sheilds on at least three separate occassions. The youngest reportedly being an 11 year old girl."

First, can you back this up with more than a bare assertion? You know, with evidence?

Secondly, only 3 TIMES? How many hundreds of times have Hamas done it? How many "civilians" would not be dead right now, if it wasn't Hamas' policy to do that ALL THE TIME?

Thirdly, one's wrongs do not excuse anothers'. Even if Israeli soldiers have done such a reprehensible act, Hamas is STILL MUCH MORE REPREHENSIBLE for doing it as a matter of course.

Those are my thoughts.

As further evidence of the Jihadists control in canada I'd like to present this article from Windsor Ontario that is across the river from the prime US target of Detriot by Islamists who may use Canadian Apartments in a Muslim area to fire rockets as they use civilians as shields.

Warning:

Before you allow Obama to give $14 Billion of YOUR tax dollars to bail out YOUR auto jobs ,make sure Obama saves American jobs first before he keeps those canadian pro-hamas supports in the CAW Union that now endorse CUPE that wants all Israeli Teachers in our Universities to swear a Loyalty oath to Hamas or be fired.

Here is the News item.

**************************************************

Written by BBS
Wednesday, 07 January 2009 03:22
Windsor West NDP Brian Masse attended a rally organized by local Palestinian and Muslim communities last Saturday. From reports in the Windsor Star, his comments were a big hit:

Rally laments Gaza bloodshed

Local leaders, activists and politicians, including CAW Local 444 president Rick Laporte, MP Brian Masse (NDP Windsor West) and city councillors Ron Jones and Caroline Postma, spoke at the rally, offering their condolences to those who've lost loved ones in the latest bloodshed.

Jones said he came to the rally not as a representative of city council or the mayor, but as a "brother" of the people in Gaza. "I come with a heart filled with grief," he said.

Masse called on the Canadian government to put pressure on Israel to end the violence in Gaza, criticizing Prime Minister Stephen Harper's response to the crisis as the crowd applauded and responded with chants of "Shame, shame."

*************************************************

And here's the media proof from the Windsor Star paper.

http://www.windsorstar.com/Rally+laments+Gaza+bloodshed/1142955/story.html

BTW
Windsor has become a hell-hole of high unemployment and a growing militant Muslim population where one Muslim was beheaded in his car by another Muslim and his son over a dispute of where the next Mosque would be built.
The police said that they have never seen such a grusome Crime Scene .
The Nihab clad females were seen in the Media leaving the court room after the bail hearing where they told the Media that the killer was a Peaceful man before he came to Canada and got corrupted by our society.

Hamas and Hezballah have set-up camp in canada
while CAIR and Sheema Khan from CAIR has crusaded for Shariah Law in our Courts where that beheading would be praised as Allah's will .

from post above... "Israeli soldiers have been taped and found to have been using human sheilds on at least three separate occassions. The youngest reportedly being an 11 year old girl.

MO foe: First, can you back this up with more than a bare assertion? You know, with evidence?

My thoughts exactly...And even if the tape exists, and even if it happened, it is the act of individual soldiers acting on their own, and not Israeli military policy...

Hamas has done this so often, it is clear that it is their policy...

Toward the Right,

I believe your assertion hard to believe. No Israeli soldier would be so dumb as to believe that hiding behind a child would stop Hamas from fireing on him. Like all Muslim Jihadists, Hamas would welcome the opportunity blow an innocent child away in the interest of Islam. It makes good press.

Tommyrot, prove your assertion of IDF using kids as cover. they would be court marshalled quicker than you could say Hamas scum.

Mo Foe, not that you can document your outrageous claim anyway, but I would suggest you go read the IDF's Charter. It makes it clear that nobody's human rights are ever to be violated and notes that the IDF is, of course, held to a higher standard of behavior than anyone else on Earth. If this did happen, which I don't believe it did, those were rogue soldiers who were operating against orders and against everything the IDF stands for.

MY BAD, Mo Foe. I meant Toward the Right. Sorry.

Was this Reuters who photographed this?

Documentation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrMvgdF5jiE

I am pro-Israel by the way. What do you think?

I should have added this link which is posted by the same group the woman interviewed is from:

B'Tselem

I'm fairly new to all of this information so I don't know the history of this particular group. The reason I bring it up at all is because it's there and I hate being caught by surprise in discussions.

It seems to be an isolated incident with litigation ensuing, as some of you mentioned.

They made a kid get out of a building. How is that using a human shield? They could have been clearing the building for a bombing. He could have been a war criminal (which I wouldn't past a Muslim over 6 years old). And there was a girl who claimed that a gun was held to her head. Ok. She probably being non-complicit to an armed officer. She was also probably lying. There was zero evidence of anything other than a kid being removed from a building, not forcefully, under no fire. I don't believe you and you have provided evidence of nothing more than your incredible gullibility and the vicious anti-Semitism of the British press.

jdamn,

I don't believe you and you have provided evidence of nothing more than your incredible gullibility and the vicious anti-Semitism of the British press.

This isn't about believing me, I didn't make a claim. I said "reportedly".

I don't want to be guilty of gullibility on either side. You may be right in all your assertions.

"They made a kid get out of a building. How is that using a human shield?"

That's not what it looks like to me. It appears they are using those kids to test for booby-trapped homes. Shame on the IDF. There's just no excusing that.

Toward the Right,

I believe your assertion hard to believe. No Israeli soldier would be so dumb as to believe that hiding behind a child would stop Hamas from fireing on him. Like all Muslim Jihadists, Hamas would welcome the opportunity blow an innocent child away in the interest of Islam. It makes good press.

Posted by: rational

I was thinking along the same lines as rational. It wouldn't work for an Israeli, because an Israeli soldier using a child as a shield would just become a more desirable target for the terrorists, and would draw more fire than a soldier by himself. That's assuming the child was another Israeli. But even if the child were a Moslem, that wouldn't matter much to the Islamist terrorists. They've certainly been willing to use children as suicide-bombers and to use school-yards as launchpads for rockets. After all if the child is killed "for Allah" he/she goes to Paradise, so it's really best for the child, isn't it?

But...but...but...but...ISRAEL!!!!
But...but...but...but...BUSH!!!!

It could be worse. Our country could be being corrupted from the inside by a xenophobic religion....

Wait a minute...

Ebonystone,

I agree. I watched another video (which I can't find now, but I'll keep looking) that showed Israeli soldiers take a young man coming out of a shop of some sort, force him to walk in front of them down a long alley to some sort of checkpoint with crude signs that identified it as a Hamas area and stand with them for a little bit.

The strange thing was that there were at least 3 photographers that I could see, taking pictures AS the soldiers pushed the young man ahead of them toward the alley. Strange that Israeli soldiers would knowingly violate the law with photographers snapping photos right in front of them, I took that one to be a set up - Hamas using Israeli uniforms.

Could this be the same thing? I don't know. According to the B'Tselem site, they were involved in an operation to find Schalit - how difficult it would be to follow guidelines knowing he could be around the next corner.

How telling that the Leftists assume that all Palestinians are murderous thugs that will never report booby-trays or Cache of weapons being held in their homes.

When I saw the video it looked like he had reported to the IDF that he found a couple of trip-wires and that his home was wire by hamas to be destroyed for Allah's cause to kill Jews.

Is it just me....or do the leftist not believe that there is just 1 palestinian on earth that isn't part of a death-cult to murder God's children for islam by using Terrorism and forcing their females to sacrifice their babies as Shields ?
Are they ALL idiots and thugs?

If so, then the West should stop any palestinian
refugeee from getting in because the Leftists asserts they can't be trusted to expose Jihadist and terror cells on our soils.

BTW
Obviouly the person working the camera didn't feel threatened from a bomb going off because they kept filming with a steady hand as if they KNEW nothing would happen, plus,why did the camera person allow this Alleged war-crime to go on as we saw with John Kerry who only opposed it when he got home as was wanting to make a Political statement.
Kerry can rant all he wants about being agianst violence and rape to females, but lets see what Kerry does when it happens in front of him and must Choose to do something or walk away and only report it years later to take the credit for being of high Morals.
If the leftists feel Palestinians are all murderous liars and thugs , how can they believe the 11 year old girl who be be under a death threat to do the interview or be raped and murdered.

The whole World except muslims knows that Israel is trying very hard to minimize civilian casualty while the palestians are trying even harder to insure maximum casualty to use as bargaining chips and public opinion.

I credit the IDF for keeping the casualties very very low, under 10,000 people. Had the palestinian had it their way they would have it over 10,000. The palestinians tried very hard and failed to push the casualties to 10,000 or over.

The muslim community should very grateful to the IDF professionalism that has saved tens of thousands of muslims in Gaza that hamas wanted sacrificed.

"Toward the Right",

You are culpable of tendentious prevarication.

Strike 3, you're out with a slider.

DHC

DHC,
While you may be a seasoned conservative who has known what is really happening in the world, I woke up from being a pacifist two months ago. My inquiry is honest and thought this was a safe place to ask. God knows, there is no one in my liberal neck of the woods who knows about ANY of this or who I can ask. Please excuse what looks like "tendentious prevarication" and know that there are a few honest, yet maybe a little bit naive, people out here.

If my questions are inappropriate, please direct me to another forum where questions are welcome.

Toward the Right,

Since you "woke up from being a pacifist two months ago" and seem to be seeking edification, here's a rough copy of a letter I've been working on to send some friends in a similar situation:

Muslims and non-Muslim apologists for Islam steadfastly claim, “Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance.” Is it really? Do you know enough about the specifics of Islamic theology to make an intelligent judgment? Or do you just take their word for it?

If you can’t answer most of the following questions, you can’t understand the truth:

1.In what order are the suras (chapters) of the Koran arranged?
2.How are the suras informally divided?
3.Which sura was the last to be revealed to Muhammad, and why is that important?
4.What is the Islamic doctrine of “abrogation”?
5.What is the Islamic doctrine of “taqiyya”?
6.Who are the “dhimmi” people, and do they have equal rights with Muslims under Islamic rule (Sharia law)?
7.What do the terms “Dar al-Islam” and “Dar al Harb” mean, and what is the significance?
8.What does Islam teach about Muslims who reject their faith?
9.Does Islamic theology allow Muslims to be true friends with non-Muslims?

Honest, serious, questioning, academic (or journalistic) inquiry is required here.

I have done that research. The first book that I read about the subject was, “The Truth about Muhammad.” (Pub. 2006) by Robert Spencer. He uses only the same written Islamic sources that Muslims use: the Qur’an, the Hadith, and the Sira; which together comprise the Sunnah. His text is only 194 pages long, but is a complete biography of Muhammad and the beginning of Islam. His book is extensively researched and referenced, revealing the truth about Islam’s founder, and whether or not Islam is a peaceful, tolerant religion.

By the way, I’m an ex-Christian Agnostic who rejects the virgin birth and so-called resurrection of Jesus. However, having once been a “born again” Christian who studied the Bible and lived that life, I know the difference between Islamic and Christian theology, and it’s night to day, dark to light and evil to good. I can dispassionately look at Islam and other religions and know the truth.

To save you some time I am going to quote from Spencer’s "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (And The Crusades)" pages 24 – 26, which explains “abrogation” in the Qur’an:
“The Qur'an's tolerant verses: ‘canceled’
....”the Qur'an's last word on jihad is not defensive, but offensive. The Suras of the Qur'an are not arranged chronologically, but according to length. However, Islamic theology divides the Qur'an into ‘Meccan’ and ‘Medinan’ suras. The Meccan ones come from the first segment of Muhammad's career as a prophet, when he simply called the Meccans to Islam. Later, after he had fled to Medina, his positions hardened. The Medinan suras are less poetic and generally much longer than those from Mecca; they're also filled with matters of law and ritual - and exhortations to jihad warfare against unbelievers. The relatively tolerant verses ... and others like them generally date from the Meccan period, while those with a more violent and intolerant edge are mostly from Medina.

“Why does this distinction matter? Because of the Islamic doctrine of abrogation . This is the idea that Allah can change or cancel what he tells Muslims: ‘If We abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten, We will replace it by a better one or one similar. Did you not know that Allah has power over all things?’ (Qur'an 2:106). According to this idea, the violent verses of the ninth sura, including the Verse of the Sword (9:5) [‘When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and render the alms levy (convert to Islam), allow them to go their way. God is forgiving and merciful.’] Also read verse 9:29, or better yet, the whole ninth sura. It replaces the peaceful verses because they were revealed later in Muhammad's prophetic career. In fact, most Muslim authorities agree that the ninth sura was the very last section of the Qur'an to be revealed.

“In line with this, some Islamic theologians have asserted that the Verse of the Sword replaces no fewer than 124 more peaceful and tolerant verses of the Qur'an. Tafsir al-Jalalayn, a commentary on the Qur'an by the respected imams Jalal al-Din Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Mahalli (1389-1459) and Jalal al-Din `Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Bakr al-Suyuti (1445-1505), asserts that the ninth sura ‘was sent down when security was removed by the sword.’ Another mainstream and respected Qur'an commentator, Isma'il bin `Amr bin Kathir al Dimashqi (1301-1372), known popularly as Ibn Kathir, declares that sura 9:5 ‘abrogated every agreement of peace between the Prophet and any idolater, every treaty, and every term.... No idolater had any more treaty or promise of safety ever since Surah Bara'ah [the ninth sura] was revealed.’ Ibn Juzayy (d. 1340), yet another Qur'an commentator whose works are still read in the Islamic world, agrees: The Verse of the Sword's purpose is ‘abrogating every peace treaty in the Qur'an.’ (From page 26): All this means that warfare against unbelievers until they either become Muslim or pay the jizya - the special tax on non-Muslims in Islamic law – ‘with willing submission’ (Qur'an 9:29) is the Qur'an's last word on jihad.”

Read “submission” as meaning “subjugation” like Blacks suffered under South African apartheid or the post American Civil War South for over a hundred years. But it was worse, far worse for non-Muslims under Muslim rule. Black people lived in “peace” with whites as long as they “knew their place” and didn’t “act uppity.” So to were non-Muslims subjected to daily acts of subjugation and humiliation according to Sharia law for over a thousand years.

The ninth sura also abrogated the early verse that Muslims so often quote as proof of Islam’s tolerance toward other religions: “There shall be no compulsion in religion” (Qur’an 2:256).

Those Muslims who claim that it still applies are either ignorant about the full teachings of their faith, or they are lying to deceive non-Muslims. That is the second Islamic doctrine mentioned previously: “taqiyya,” lying to deceive unbelievers is “morally” acceptable if the lie advances Islam.

Spencer relates it best in “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam,” page 80: "Religious deception (practiced on hapless unbelievers) is taught by the Qur'an itself, telling Muslims: 'Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers. If any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah; except by way of precaution, that ye may guard yourselves from them' (Qur'an 3:28). In other words, don't make friends with unbelievers except to 'guard yourselves from them': Pretend to be their friends so that you can strengthen yourself against them. The distinguished Qur'anic commentator Ibn Kathir explains that, in this verse, 'Allah prohibited His believing servants from becoming supporters of the disbelievers, or to take them as comrades with whom they develop friendships, rather than the believers.' However, exempted from this rule were 'those believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers. In this case, such believers are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly.' "

However, there are other authors who also examine the true nature of Islam but from personal experience.

Read Ibn Warraq’s book, “Why I Am Not a Muslim.” He is a former Pakistani Muslim who rejected Islam. He dissects its theology and history with a very sharp pen.

Read “Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide” (“Dhimmi” is the Arabic/Muslim term for Christians and Jews.) by Bat Ye’or. She was born an Egyptian Jew whose family had to flee from Muslim persecution. She is the foremost authority on this subject, revealing the history of Muslim treatment of the Dhimmi people from Islam’s beginning to now.

Read Brigitte Gabriel’s “Because They Hate: A Survivor of Islamic Terror Warns America.” She was born an Arab Christian in Lebanon whose family suffered through the Islamist jihad of the Lebanese Civil War. She explains America’s own peril.

They all emphasize the real nature of true Islam and the danger to Western and American civilization. If you have any journalistic integrity, you will read those books and find the truth about Islam’s threat.

The rockets came from Lebanon. Hezbollah's denying that it was them and pinning it on "Palestinian terror groups."

Wrong thread. My bad.

Welcome to our world, Toward the Right. I apologize for jumping down your throat. In all fairness, though, you made an assertion about the IDF. It wasn't a question. I personally hold the IDF in the highest esteem and get tired of people endlessly fabricating human rights violations on their part. You did not, in the spirit of the usual craziness I hear every day, accuse them of "genocide" or a "holocaust" or anything, but the IDF is certainly above using people as human shields.

They're such a class act, in fact, that the US forces, for whom I also have tremendous respect and admiration, pale in comparison in terms of respect for the enemy, and this enemy is so vicious that, at this point, almost nobody will go on the record in support of them. There would never be an Israeli Guantanamo (not that our troops are really responsible for Guantanamo), and you will never hear about a Red Crescent outfit getting accidentally bombed by the IDF.

You should be cynical when you hear things like this. In all fairness, at least you had video, albeit rather unconvincing video. Never believe photographs. Not only are many of them photoshopped, but major news organizations have been complicit in staging scenes so as to make it appear as if the IDF did horrible things which never happened.

Here's some background:

http://www.theaugeanstables.com/2006/08/10/meditations-on-reutersgate-whats-going-on-in-the-msm/

http://www.zombietime.com/reuters_photo_fraud/

You may notice the famous "eyebrowless woman" and "green helmet man" in the last link. Since the beginning of Operation Cast Lead we've seen the same phenomenon repeat itself with "brown jacket man" and "naked toddler with week-old wonds and multiple fathers." This is why I'm cynical when I hear about misconduct on the part of the IDF. The MSM really do try to demonize them and have no problem forsaking all journalistic ethics to do so. France 2 just did the same thing. It's very sad.

Please feel free to ask questions in here. I'm a recovering centrist and useful idiot. I've only been researching Islam for about a year now. I was always aware of anti-Semitism and anti-American bias in the media, as well as the fact that there was something deeply wrong with Islam, but I was willfully ignorant about what exactly it was that was the problem.

You may appreciate a book called "History Upside Down" by David Meir-Levi.

jdamn: Respectfully I would ask what would be the difference between Guantanamo and the most hardened Israeli prisons where Islamic terrorist thugs are kept? I think very little, if any. Gitmo is a place where captured enemy combattants have prayer rugs, a copy of the Koran, diets of their choice and so on. I am one who is glad President Bush some seven years ago authorized Guantanamo to take in some of the vilest human beings who walk the earth, inaccurate and hyped bleeding heart allegations notwithstanding. Also, I am not aware that the rules of engagement for the American Armed forces pale in comparison, as you allege, to that of the IDF. Both of these militaries, to my knowledge, have the highest standards for this but perhaps you have information here I am not aware of.

After sleeping on this I get it. What you all are saying is that the IDF was not using the young man as a human shield - as they were not in the other video I watched. So I see that I did make an assertion because I was agreeing with the point of view in the video and was gullible to assume the "human shield" title was indeed what was happening.
Now I see what you all are getting at - there is no evidence of any danger to the young man and something else is most likely going on.

Thors_Hammer,
Thank you for posting your letter. I get most of those points but some are still fuzzy, will be reading those books as time allows.

jdamn,

you made an assertion about the IDF. It wasn't a question.

I see that now, but my question was sincere - wondered what others saw and thought so thank you for your input.

I personally hold the IDF in the highest esteem and get tired of people endlessly fabricating human rights violations on their part.

and

They're such a class act

This is what I need to learn more about. It's a bit daunting to sift through all of the information on the web and get to the truth. Thank you.

First of all, to jdamn, I accept your apology.

Secondly, after seeing the video that Toward the Right linked to, I sill stand by what I said before; namely that Hamas is reprehensible for their constantly using their civilian population and mosques as human shields and ammo dumps, respectively.

It is soooo often done, that it seems like policy! Utterly comtempible.

As for the IDF video, what we saw was a Palestinian boy walking up some stairs in front of IDF soldiers. What that was, is seriously open to interpretation.

The kid could've been doing any number of things; acting as a translator, showing the soldiers where families were hiding, showing them where militants had holed up, etc, etc, etc.

There is no proof, strictly from the video images, that the kid was in danger, or being coerced by the soldiers or anything.

As for the Palestinian girl, she could be lying, or she could've been hiding something, or she could've been, innocently perhaps, getting in the way of their operation, and so she was threatened with a gun.

Bottom line is that the IDF doesn't have an actual policy of using human shields, doesn't deliberately (or randomly) target civilians, and is going to extraordinary measures to minimize civilian casualties.

All of which makes them different from, and clearly morally superior to Hamas.

Besides, any Gazan who voted for Hamas, with their charter explicitly calling for the destruction of Israel and the death of Jews, in my opinion, IS NO LONGER A CIVILIAN, and is a legitimate target.

Oh, Wellington, I don't think that the rules of engagement actually differ between those of the IDF and the USAF, but I know that Israel is aware of the fact that they are held to a different standard than any other military. I also think that they are considerably more careful, especially in situations like this. For example, I can't imagine the IDF using napalm like we did in Vietnam. Today I imagine we would use bunker busters anyway, but I get the impression that, especially while Rummie was in power, the consensus at the highest levels was that we can always make everything okay by throwing money at it, and I never heard a huge apology for bombing the Red Crescent outfit in Iraq.

I also don't think that anyone was ever treated that badly in Israeli prisons (at least by the Israelis, although, watching the special on the Hamas leader's son, the situation with the other prisoners is clearly quite different). I can't believe we give terrorists Korans in Guantanamo or that we handle them with gloves. It's like doing that with Nazi POWs and Mein Kampf. Judging by the size of Samir Kuntar when he got out of prison, I don't imagine the IDF is mistreating people. My point was that the IDF wouldn't try to hold people indefinitely without trial. On the contrary, they're inclined to let them go for stupid reasons like trading prisoners who should be doing life for the ashes of dead soldiers.

I did not say any of that in order to disparage our troops, but I do think that their leadership has made some blunders and the IDF would be more careful because they know that people will exploit ay errors on their part. You can check out their ethical code here: http://dover.idf.il/IDF/English/about/doctrine/ethics.htm

Finally, I think that both militaries are at times way too kind to an enemy who has no respect for human life. I don't think we should lower ourselves to their level, but I don't, for instance, think we should give a second thought to, for example, destroying mosques and evacuated madrassas, and if anything should make a point of destroying as many as we can when we're at war with a combatant Muslim enemy.