tomndebb is a genocide denier

[iiandyiiii]

@The_Second_Stone

So you are saying that I am not applying a correct definition to the facts? That I am not weighing and applying the facts correctly? Do you accept the definition?

I do not believe you are applying the correct definition to the facts. You have not established that the Israelis are taking actions with the “intent to destroy, in whole or in part”, the Palestinian people.

[John_Mace]

@The_Second_Stone

That would require a redefinition of the word “unique” which means one of kind. The definition I use is the legally accepted internationally accepted definition of the word “genocide”.

So, which “part” of the Palestinian population is Israel trying to destroy? Please be specific.

[El_Kabong]

Protip for those applying for a long-term visa to the USA: for the question asking whether you have ever participated in genocide, the correct answer is NOT “enthusiastically”.

[The_Second_Stone]

@John_Mace

So, which “part” of the Palestinian population is Israel trying to destroy? Please be specific.

The ones they have killed and rendered homeless.

[John_Mace]

@The_Second_Stone

The ones they have killed and rendered homeless.

I was joking earlier when I predicted you would say that. Are you serious?

[The_Second_Stone]

@iiandyiiii

I do not believe you are applying the correct definition to the facts. You have not established that the Israelis are taking actions with the “intent to destroy, in whole or in part”, the Palestinian people.

That is a dodge. Answer the question. Is the definition I have cited the correct definition of genocide in your opinion? I’m not yet asking you the facts. To the extent this is a dialogue, we first argue about definitions. Is the international legal definition set forth by the UN and agreed by its members the international legal definition or is it something else. Yes, or no. If no, you may link to the definition you choose, make up a definition that suits the case you intend to make or otherwise. But yes or no first.

[The_Second_Stone]

@John_Mace

I was joking earlier when I predicted you would say that. Are you serious?

Well, you contend you were joking. Killing and rendering people homeless can in fact be genocide. I don’t think that five decades of conflict, slaughter and destruction is a joking matter.

I link once again to Prof Cohn’s summary and include a snip US Leaders Aid and Abet Israeli War Crimes, Genocide & Crimes against Humanity - JURIST - Commentary - Legal News & Commentary

(1) Willful killing: Israeli forces have killed nearly 2,000 Palestinians (more than 400 children and over 80% civilians). Israel used 155-millimeter artillery, which, according to Human Rights Watch, is “utterly inappropriate in a densely populated area, because this kind of artillery is considered accurate if it lands anyplace within a 50-meter radius.”

(2) Willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health: Nearly 10,000 people, 2,500 of them children, have been wounded. Naban Abu Shaar told the Daily Beast that the dead bodies from what appeared to be a “mass execution” in Khuza’a looked like they were “melted” and were piled on top of each other; assault rifle bullet casings found in the house were marked “IMI” (Israel Military Industries). UNICEF said the Israeli offensive has had a “catastrophic and tragic impact” on children in Gaza; about 373,000 children have had traumatic experiences and need psychological help. The UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) said: “There’s a public health catastrophe going on. You know, most of the medical facilities in Gaza are non-operational.”

(3) Unlawful and wanton, extensive destruction and appropriation of property not justified by military necessity: Tens of thousands of Palestinians have lost their homes. More than 1,300 buildings were destroyed and 752 were severely damaged. Damage to sewer and water infrastructure has affected two-thirds of Gazans. On July 20, Israeli forces virtually flattened the small town of Khuza’a; one man counted 360 shell attacks in one hour. Reconstruction of Gaza is estimated to cost $6 billion. Israel shrunk Gaza’s habitable land mass by 44 percent, establishing a 3 km “no-go” zone for Palestinians; 147 square miles of land will be compressed into 82 square miles. Oxfam described the level of destruction as “outrageous … much worse than anything we have seen in previous [Israeli] military operations.”

(4) Willfully depriving a prisoner of war or a civilian the rights of fair and regular trial: Nearly 2,000 Palestinians were arrested by Israeli forces during July 2014, according to the Palestinian Prisoners Center for Studies. Prisoners include 15 members of the Palestinian Legislative Council, about 240 children, dozens of women, journalists, activists, academics and 62 former prisoners previously released in a prisoner exchange. Israeli forces executed many prisoners after arrest, either by directly firing on them, refusing to allow treatment or allowing them to bleed to death. More than 445 prisoners are being held without charge or trial under administrative detention.

(5) Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population, civilian objects, or humanitarian vehicles, installations and personnel: “The civilian population in the Gaza Strip is under direct attack,” reads a joint declaration of over 150 international law experts. Israeli forces violated the principle of “distinction,” which forbids deliberate attacks on civilians or civilian objects. Israeli forces bombed 142 schools (89 run by the UN), including six UN schools in which civilians were taking refuge. Israeli forces shot and killed fleeing civilians (warnings, which must effectively give civilians time to flee before bombing, do not relieve Israel from its legal obligations not to target civilians). Israeli forces repeatedly bombed Gaza’s only power plant and other infrastructure, which are “beyond repair.” Israeli forces bombed one-third of Gaza’s hospitals, 14 primary healthcare clinics and 29 ambulances. At least five medical staff were killed and tens of others were injured.

(6) Intentionally launching attacks with knowledge they will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or long-term severe damage to the natural environment, if they are clearly excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage: The principle of “proportionality” forbids disproportionate and excessive civilian casualties compared to the claimed military advantage gained in the attack. The Dahiye Doctrine directly violates this principle. Responding to Hamas’ rockets with 155-millimeter artillery is disproportionate. Although nearly 2,000 Palestinians (over 80 percent civilians) have been killed, 67 Israelis (all but three of them soldiers) have been killed. The coordinates of all UN facilities were repeatedly communicated to the Israeli forces; they nevertheless bombed them multiple times. Civilians were attacked in Shuja’iyyah market.

(7) Attacking or bombarding undefended towns, villages, dwellings or buildings, or intentionally attacking religious, educational and medical buildings, which are not military objectives: On July 20, Israeli forces virtually flattened the small town of Khuza’a; one man counted 360 shell attacks in one hour. Israeli forces bombed 142 schools (89 run by the UN), one-third of Gaza’s hospitals, 14 primary healthcare clinics, and 29 ambulances. Israeli shelling completely destroyed 41 mosques and partially destroyed 120 mosques.

Some seem to be arguing definition, others seem to be arguing the facts are not “bad enough” and others are calling everyone liars. This has been going on for five decades based on ethnic differences and religious differences.

[iiandyiiii]

@The_Second_Stone

That is a dodge. Answer the question. Is the definition I have cited the correct definition of genocide in your opinion?

Sure. This was implied in my answer – I quoted part of the definition. Yes, that’s a reasonable definition.

[The_Second_Stone]

@iiandyiiii

Sure. This was implied in my answer – I quoted part of the definition. Yes, that’s a reasonable definition.

I applaud you for accepting the UN definition as the reasonable definition of genocide.

I gather that you do not agree the facts amount to filling that definition. Is that correct?

[iiandyiiii]

@The_Second_Stone

I applaud you for accepting the UN definition as the reasonable definition of genocide.

I gather that you do not agree the facts amount to filling that definition. Is that correct?

Yes, that’s correct. I do not agree the facts meet that definition. Specifically the “intent to destroy, in whole or in part”.

[LavenderBlue]

Fuck. I thought I was on his ignore list.

[Trinopus]

@The_Second_Stone

The ones they have killed and rendered homeless.

Rendering someone homeless qualifies as genocide?

Wow, this “mission creep” is way out of hand. What next, calling someone a vile name?

[RTFirefly]

@Trinopus

Rendering someone homeless qualifies as genocide?

Wow, this “mission creep” is way out of hand. What next, calling someone a vile name?

Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries.

There, I have committed genocide against you, Trinopus! But I defy all the Genevans in the Convention to do anything about it!

[Trinopus]

Aiee! I have been destroyed, wholly or in part!

[Little_Nemo]

TSS, if I understand your earlier post, you acknowledge there can be killing as war without it being genocide. But you say that this killing is genocide and not war - on both sides. Can you explain what it is about this conflict that causes you to make this judgement?

[Little_Nemo]

@The_Second_Stone

Some seem to be arguing definition, others seem to be arguing the facts are not “bad enough” and others are calling everyone liars. This has been going on for five decades based on ethnic differences and religious differences.

I agree that for most of us this appears to be a question of definitions. We’re in general agreement on the amount of people who have been killed or wounded and the amount of property that has been destroyed. Our dispute is whether this amount is within the realm of a normal war or rises to the level of genocide. Most of us feel that it does not rise to the genocide level. We’re not disputing what’s happening; we’re just disputing your term for what’s happening.

[tomndebb]

@Trinopus

Wow, this “mission creep” is way out of hand. What next, calling someone a vile name?

Be careful. He has already begun using the phrase “genocide denier” as his opening gambit to commit genocide on the SDMB.

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@andros

.
Dear The Second Stone,

I don’t start Pit threads. Hell, I don’t often start threads of any sort. But hey, I figure I’ll hook you up with a place to complain without all the passive-aggressive bullshit. I’m a helper!

I’d avoided the most recent of the Israel/Palestine threads, and MENA threads in general. But I happened on this thread you started in ATMB, in which you asked:

Like an ad in the bolour supplement, that really bought my eye. A handy link from BPC took me over to this gem of a GD thread, which is a discussion about the ethics and morality of Israeli policy toward Palestinians in general and Gazans in particular.

Now, I get your perspective. I really do. You think that Israel is an aggressor, an occupier, an oppressor. I don’t entirely disagree. You also think that Israel is directly comparable, in action and morality, to Nazi Germany:

You also have decided that Israel is “bottling up families in the Gaza ghetto and then periodically slaughtering them” and “a fascist nation implementing fascist policies”.

Ok, I get that. Again, I don’t *entirely *disagree. Heck, you say that “collective punishment is a crime against humanity,” and I largely agree with that. But then you start in on genocide. Israel is committing it. And, apparently, anyone who does not actively condemn its actions supports that genocide.

Excuse me, check that: that anyone who disagrees with you is a “genocide denier.”

Leaving aside that terminology, which to my eyes is clearly intended to parallel “Holocaust denier” (and is not even remotely the same in any sense), you made some specific claims about Israeli actions against Palestinian civilians that you believe support your belief in Palestinian genocide. You very specifically cited a piece from Chris Hedges writing in Salon as providing examples of “what Israeli soldiers do for fun.” You proceed to talk about Israel, as a nation, “machine gunning young boys, bombing schools and hospitals…bait[ing] and murder[ing] young boys, bomb[ing] civilians and schools.” You talk about “baiting and machine gunning little boys” a couple more times. You’re really hammering on it, and understandably; it’s a hell of a rhetorical image. But…is it true? Is it verifiable?

So tomndeb decides to call you on it:

In response, you again cite the Hedges piece. He replies with some points about Mr. Hedges’ reliability as a journalist and witness. And that’s when, IMever-soHO, you lost your shit. tom~ is now, to your mind, a “genocide denier.” Which brings us back around to your ATMB thread. You’d like to put this scurrilous genocide denier on ignore. He’s awful and a denier and probably a Nazi to boot. But, understandably, you’d prefer not to name names in an ATMB thread.

To make my point perfectly clear: That is some seriously next-level passive-aggressive bullshit. I don’t give all that many fucks about your posts in re Israel or Gaza or fascism or genocide. I think you have some good points, and some utterly asinine ones. I think you’re a fucking idiot for saying that tom~ is a denier of, supporter of, and apologist for genocide. But what actually irritates me–enough to write this inane, borderline-unreadable abortion of a Pit thread–is your being such a goddamn passive-aggressive baby about it.
So here ya fucking go. Your very own thread. Calling tomndeb out by name as a genocide denier. I did it for you so you don’t have to. Tell him all about it. Really lay into him. Don’t say I never did anything for ya.
(But please remember: this is not a thread for complaining about moderation. I’d hate to see warnings or a banhammer come down, so leave that “biased mods” stuff out of it. Don’t start on how tom~'s being a horrible, horrible moderator.

This is just a safe place for you to talk about tom~'s being a horrible, horrible person.)

.

I try not to get involved in these sort of threads either (with more mixed success) and Tom N Debb has always seemed pretty fair in his moderation. I’ve called out other moderators on their biased moderation of Israel threads but never Tom N Debb.

[The_Second_Stone]

@Damuri_Ajashi

I try not to get involved in these sort of threads either (with more mixed success) and Tom N Debb has always seemed pretty fair in his moderation. I’ve called out other moderators on their biased moderation of Israel threads but never Tom N Debb.

So you at least agreed in the past that the moderation on Israel/Palestine was biased by at least some moderators? But you’ve never felt that with respect to Tomndebb. I agree that other moderators are biased on the issue and that moderators can be biased on the issue.

[Trinopus]

@Damuri_Ajashi

I try not to get involved in these sort of threads either (with more mixed success) and Tom N Debb has always seemed pretty fair in his moderation. I’ve called out other moderators on their biased moderation of Israel threads but never Tom N Debb.

Why the misspelling of the name? Would you not feel misused if someone misspelled your login name in a similar fashion?