Thank you for raising that point, Mr. Manfrenjenssen
Oh as a side comment to the BlackHawk Down reference I made… At one point the author talks about how some of the militia had training from terrorists from either the Israel-Palestine conflict or elsewhere (and I can’t remember which)… Nor does he go into what training was recieved. However, there is a comment about how using women and children as shields looks to western audiences (from news reports). Which strikes me as post a tactical advantage, and a propaganda plot and something that was thought out ahead of time.
Unless I’m totally getting all of this confused in my head.
Well the instances of Palestinian terrorists using civilians as human shields is v.rare. They are naturally based in civilian areas as Palestine has virtually no military infrastructure so Israeli.
However, the instance of the IDF using Palestinian civilians human shields (forcing them a gunpoint to walk into houses that they suspect are booby trapped, etc.) are well-documented in HRW’s report on the assault on the Jenin refugee camp. According to B’Tslem 1 Palestinian civilian has died as a result of this policy so far.
And NONE of Europe would be speaking German if we all had your such attitude.
CRorex -
As far as I can tell, the estimable CfW was arguing that it doesn’t really matter whether or not the Palestinian children were being used as shields.
To his diseased imagination, their lives are of so little moment that, shields or no, they can be exterminated without thought. The lives of such children are not even worthy of the effort needed to determine the guilty from the innocent. Even innocent Palestinian children grow up to be adults, who are presumed to be worthy of death by the simple fact of their membership in the despised ethnic class. Hence the “nits make lice” remark.
As 3waygeek points out, the most famous use of that phrase was in connection with the slaughter of another ethnic group that was considered by its attackers to be a ‘weed’ species, and not worthy of human consideration at all.
I need hardly repeat that such an attitude is exactly similar to that shown by those who attack Israeli civilians, including women and children, who are presumed to be worthy of death or injury because of their status as Jews.
And, of course, very much of a piece with the attitude of a demented former paper-hanger who also regarded certain ethnic sub-types as worthy of torture and death.
Clint from Wichita’s argument was not even that the death of innocent children was an unfortunate consequence of the violence in Israel and the Palestinian territories. It was that these deaths were not unfortunate at all. Palestinian children - the “nits” - grow up to be Palestinian adults - the “lice”.
And with the natural jealousy of the less-evolved towards the more-evolved life forms, Clint calls for the death of lice and nits together.
To which attitude I said, and repeat, a very special, and heart-felt, ‘Fuck You’.
Regards,
Shodan
Erm, but I do speak German. It’s rather useful - I can order beers in Berlin, chitchat with people in Munich.
Must admit, my french is a bit crap. Any ideas which attitude would help that?
Wasn’t sure if you were an asshat or not-- thanks for the clarification.
Is it me or has Annoying Newbie Season started early this year?
My point was mainly: ITS NOT FREAKING HARD TO FIND THIS STUFF OUT YOURSELF! In almost the same time it took to type, “Cite?” I found a pile of information. Granted 99.99% of it was related to the UN condemnation of the neighbor policy.
This is why I don’t go into great debates.
Of specific note is the final URL I posted.
It appears to encourage palestian youth to place themselves in position where there is a high chance they would be caught in a firefight between the two sides. That is irresponsible.
My post was all about looking information up for yourself.
I really can’t understand your point here CRorex.
CiW makes claim about Palestinians using children as human shields.
Twisty asks for cite.
What the fuck is wrong with asking for a cite on a claim? Shit, shouldn’t the burden of proof be on the person making a claim rather than the reader?
Yeah matey: you made the claim, you do the work. You did in the end, but it took a bit of you shouting first (and afterwards).
Fuck you Crorex.
I asked for a cite, as the burden of proof is on clint to back up his assertion. thats the way it is, the way it was, and the way it always will be.
If you had taken thirty seconds to read some of your own cites, you would see that the link to fair.org is talking about Israeli Defence Force using human shields.
If you had taken 30 seconds to read the crimes of war link, you would see the only mention of human shields is this
bolding mine.
the accusation of using human shields revolve around palestinian terrorists storing equipment in populated areas. Or the younger palestinians throwing stones at incursing israeli tanks, which they are not forced to do. Infact, the PA are discouraging children under 16 from taking part.
(from your first link)
the accusation of the IDF using human shields were they forced palestinians ahead of them into houses that they suspected may be boobytrapped.
Can you see the difference?
typing “Palestinian Human Shield” into google is not doing research if you dont look at the links you post.
as for your last link, it dosent encourage children to fight against the tank. In fact, it says that the parents tell them NOT to throw stones against the tanks, as there have been many children shot.
With all do respect, I think your first interpretation was far of the mark. Not a heavy criticism - You were obviously unaware of the historical connotation of that phrase ( which 3waygeek concisely explained ) and the actual meaning of the word “nit” in relation to lice ( which stofsky pointed out - obviously “nitpick” derives from the tedious, if necessary, practice of picking of tiny lice eggs from an infested persons body/hair ). But no, Clint deserved absolutely no benefit of the doubt for his comments - If you understand the reference, it was crystal clear and unambiguous. All credit to Shodan for pitting him over that remark ( those as usual I think it is a waste of time, except as catharsis ).
I think this hijack on “human-shields” is better suited to GD. Though from my standpoint, I assume it is a given that such things are going to occur ( and on both sides ). I consider it part and parcel of nasty counter-insurgency/guerilla struggles like this. The only debate I suppose is whether it is deliberate day-to-day policy by any side, rather than just heat of battle barbarity. That, I suspect, is not easily resolved, especially as individual commanders might “exceed their orders” with a fair bit of deniability ( and in the Palestinian case is also complicated by the myriad of different sides involved - i.e. it may or may not be “PA” policy, but it might be a faction of the PA’s policy or Hamas policy or none-of-the-above ).
- Tamerlane
…though as usual…
- Tamerlane
I love a good laugh in the morning. Cheers.
I must admit that I’ve not heard that one before.
Lib “Proud to be a Louse” ertarian
It’s one of those phrases that make my fists itch. The only person I’ve ever met who used it was a contemptible little bigot who also happily used phrases like “the fruit doesn’t fall far from the tree”.
I honestly think this kind of overt racism is less common than it used to be. And I am sort of cheered up by the fact that Libertarian hasn’t been subjected to it.
Until now. :rolleyes:
How do you say “Merry Christmas” in Cherokee?
Regards,
Shodan
stofsky, I knew that nits were lice eggs, I just never put that word together with nitpicking to think that they were actually related. Seems a pretty obvious relationship now, though. Thanks
Tamerlane, yes, I was unaware of the historical connotation of the phrase when it was originally posted. I now know that I was originally incorrect so I retract my previous statements. Carry on.