Attack on UN School Illegal Any Way You Cut It

By Emily

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rGOWkWYqJ4]

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itHo5oHhipI]

Just to reiterate: Israel has bombed UN compounds in which civilians had taken refuge many times before. This should come as no surprise.

UN representatives and witnesses have said that there were no fighters inside the school. Even IF, as the second report above states, there were some fighters firing rounds from outside of the school nearby, it is well within Palestinian rights under international law to fire on an occupying foreign army invading Gaza. The Israeli occupation of Gaza is illegal, as a foundation, and furthermore the shelling of a UN compound in which civilians were taking shelter is illegal. Israel’s argument that they were responding to an attack from the school does not hold up under international law: it does not remove their obligation to refrain from indiscriminate attack.

CNN said yesterday that the reason that we only see wounded and killed civilians in the pictures coming out of Gaza is because Hamas controls the media. And yet, they totally drop their journalistic obligation to mention that Israel has blocked international journalists from entering the Strip for MONTHS ahead of this attack.

*Here’s a facebook group for you: Mark Regev, you are a lying sack of shit.

Tarboush Tip: Diala

Share and Enjoy:

Tags: Emily, Gaza, human rights, israel, war crimes, war of terror

This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 7th, 2009 at 11:33 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

Comments to “Attack on UN School Illegal Any Way You Cut It”

Fadi

January 7, 2009 at 11:56 am

Israel seems to enjoy attacking UN compounds. Remember Qana.

Reply

#2825

Anonymous

January 7, 2009 at 12:25 pm

And Israel’s enemies seem to enjoy using UN compounds as launchpads to attack Israel.

Emily, you’re… what can one say about you that you don’t already know. You’re just sad, Emily.

Here’s your perverted logic:

1) Israel deliberately killed innocent civilians and there were no Hamas cells operating in the area (even though we know the NAMES of the cell)

2) Even if Israel WAS responding to a Hamas mortar team operating from a UN compound (which WOULD be legal), it is still wrong, because Hamas is “resistance” and Israel is the aggressor. Hamas can use UN compounds to launch attacks and Israel can never respond.

In other words, Israel cannot be in the right, under any circumstances. If it deliberately hit civilians it is evil. And if it deliberately hit a Hamas mortar team, it is evil. And speaking of rights, who gave the Jews the right to defend themselves, anyway? The Jews should just go back to the ovens, right?

Reply

#2824

Roy

January 7, 2009 at 12:42 pm

an occupying foreign army invading Gaza

I love this one. Is it occupying, or is it invading?

Wait! It’s both!

Emily, you’re overwrought. It’s very distressing to have civilians be killed.

Israel’s argument that they were responding to an attack from the school does not hold up under international law: it does not remove their obligation to refrain from indiscriminate attack.

If they were targeting militants who were firing on them, it wasn’t indiscriminate.

the shelling of a UN compound in which civilians were taking shelter is illegal.

Actually, it would be illegal to target such a compound only if it were not being used for military purposes. That’s why Hamas is wrong for using it that way. You only excuse them because you’re overwrought. Not because you’re working backward from your preconceived conclusion that Israel is always wrong.

Nobody said it was illegal for Hamas to fire on the invading forces, hon. Only that it was illegal for them to use civilians as cover.

For what it’s worth, a large number of Israel strikes have been aborted precisely because the risk to civilians was too great. I know, you somehow know that’s a lie.

Reply

#2823

Roy

January 7, 2009 at 12:59 pm

they totally drop their journalistic obligation to mention that Israel has blocked international journalists from entering the Strip

Oh no! I guess we’ll never know what’s going on in there! I wonder if there have been any air strikes, or any civilians killed?

“Why isn’t the international media trying its luck with Egypt?[...]Both countries have the same interest in the same policy – Hamas is equally dangerous to Israel, to Egypt and to the Palestinian Authority.”

[still quoting]:
Government Press Office director Danny Seaman [said] that foreign correspondents would use their time in Gaza to report Hamas propaganda unchallenged

[and about dropping their obligation to mention]:
the BBC, CNN and Sky News have started most reports on Gaza in recent days by stating that Israel has not given their correspondents access to Gaza

Reply

#2822

Roy

January 7, 2009 at 1:49 pm

Just a clarification: the school wasn’t hit. People inside the school weren’t killed. People outside the school were killed.

Some 280 families — 1,674 people — had been sheltering inside the school[...]
The Israeli mortars killed as many as 40 people outside the school; Palestinian hospital officials said Tuesday that 10 of the dead were children and 5 were women.

Just so you know the school was not targeted.

And the yikes quote:
On a loudspeaker, a man praised the dead and said: “What Israel is doing is bringing us unity again! We are all together!”

That’s taking “make lemonade” to kind a creepy place.

Reply

#2821

Fadi

January 7, 2009 at 2:02 pm

In April, 1996, Israel attacked a UN compound in southern Lebanon. In that instance, Israel first dropped leaflets in surrounding villages telling the civilians to flee. After the civilians found refugee in the UN compound at Qana, Israeli war planes attacked the compound with precision killing over 100 civilians.

Reply

#2820

Roy

January 7, 2009 at 3:26 pm

Whoops, my mistake. Wrong decade. I cited the 2006 incident.

The 1996 incident was the result of an errant shell. Israel immediately expressed regret for the loss of innocent lives, saying that the Hezbollah position and not the UN compound was the intended target of the shelling, and that the compound was hit “due to incorrect targeting based on erroneous data.”

I know, you claim Israel’s just lying when they express regret. And of course, Hamas never expresses regret, and you love them.

So I think the moral is: don’t express regret.

Reply

#2819

Fadi

January 7, 2009 at 4:03 pm

In April, 1996, Israel attacked a UN compound in southern Lebanon. In that instance, Israel first dropped leaflets in surrounding villages telling the civilians to flee. After the civilians found refugee in the UN compound at Qana, Israeli war planes attacked the compound with precision killing over 100 civilians.

Israel’s apologists claim that the murder resulted from “an errant shell.” However, dozens of shells were used in the bombing. An independent UN investigation confirmed that the bombing was was unlikely to be a product of technical or procedural errors.

The majority of times that Israel kills innocent civilians (and, objectively, Israel has killed a very large number of civilians over the past 60 years), it expresses regret for the loss of innocent life. However, such expressions of regret do not bring back those that died, and come off as disingenuous when proceeded by some attempt at justification.

Reply

#2818

Sean

January 7, 2009 at 5:04 pm

Israel always claims that there are militants present using people as “human shields” whenever they attack civilians. What they are doing when they say this is admitting that they know there are civilians present when they attack, which thus constitutes a war crime.

The alleged presence of militants does not give you the legal right to launch an indiscriminate attack when there is a strong likelihood many civilians casualties will result. As Amnesty International explains it:

Article 51(4) of Protocol I prohibits indiscriminate attacks, which are those:
“of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction.”

Disproportionate attacks, a type of indiscriminate attack, are also those that:
“may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.”(Article 51(5))

Intentionally launching a disproportionate attack is a war crime.(23) Launching an indiscriminate attack resulting in loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects is also a war crime.(24)

In addition, incidental losses and damage should never be extensive.(25) The extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly, is a war crime.(26)

Article 57 requires all parties to exercise constant care “to spare the civilian population, civilians and civilian objects.” Article 57(2) stipulates that those intending to attack shall:
“(i) do everything feasible to verify that the objectives to be attacked are neither civilians nor civilian objects and are not subject to special protection but are military objectives within the meaning of paragraph 2 of Article 52 and that it is not prohibited by the provisions of this Protocol to attack them;

“(ii) take all feasible precautions in the choice of means and methods of attack with a view to avoiding, and in any event to minimizing, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects;
“(iii) refrain from deciding to launch any attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated;

“(b) an attack shall be cancelled or suspended if it becomes apparent that the objective is not a military one or is subject to special protection or that the attack may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated;

It is difficult to see given these how the alleged presence of a mortar crew would justify an attack that put the lives of thousands of civilians at risk, in a UN protected compound no less.

Also, Israel used an artillery or mortar barrage against the compound, which are area of effect weapons and inherently indiscriminate in that they cannot be targeted with sufficient precision to avoid damaging or killing nearby civilians.

In either case, Israel’s assertion is most likely bullshit. There has never, to my knowledge, ever been any evidence that Hamas or Hezbollah uses human shields, and quite a bit of evidence that the IDF does so as a matter of policy. The Israeli supreme court has even outlawed the practice, though there is evidence the IDF does not comply with this ruling.

http://tinyurl.com/9hu2k2

Reply

#2817

Anonymous

January 7, 2009 at 5:40 pm

There has never, to my knowledge, ever been any evidence that Hamas or Hezbollah uses human shields

Then you misunderstand the term. Embedding a military force within a civilian population is a war crime. Dispersing weapons amongst a civilian population is a war crime. Boobytrapping civilian areas is a war crime. Firing weapons from within civilian areas is a war crime. Not identifying yourself as a combatant is a war crime. Etc. Etc. Etc.

I URGE you to take Israel to the Hague. They will be cleared so fast your head will spin. I’ve studied international law for three years. Everything Israel has done is in complete compliance – in fact above the standards imposed by Geneva.

I think you’ve forgotten when Israel makes phone calls for the residents of a home to clear it, because it is about to be bombed, Hamas often gathers mothers and their babies on the rooftops, who wave at the Israeli drones. This is the traditional definition of human shields.

And to answer your question directly, if Hamas was launching mortars from the grounds of the UN school, (that’s in itself a war crime, but not my point), they then are a legitimate target for retaliation. It doesn’t matter if they are surrounded by a hundred innocent children and one tank shell will kill everyone.

The laws of war were created to PREVENT exactly this kind of abuse of a civilian population by a military force.

Reply

#2816

Super Sayyin

January 7, 2009 at 7:48 pm

“Then you misunderstand the term. Embedding a military force within a civilian population is a war crime.”

I’ve been to Israel. Half the population walks around with government issued weapons. There are military bases smack dab in the middle of Tel Aviv. If Hamas is guilty of this then so is Israel on a far larger scale.

“I URGE you to take Israel to the Hague. They will be cleared so fast your head will spin.”

No, they wont.

“I’ve studied international law for three years.”

No, you haven’t.

“Everything Israel has done is in complete compliance – in fact above the standards imposed by Geneva.”

Israel violates the Geneva convention on a daily basis.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3593718.stm

“And to answer your question directly, if Hamas was launching mortars from the grounds of the UN school, (that’s in itself a war crime, but not my point), they then are a legitimate target for retaliation. It doesn’t matter if they are surrounded by a hundred innocent children and one tank shell will kill everyone.”

First of all, there is no evidence of mortars being fired from the school (and there probably never will be because Israel has barred foreign journalists from entering the strip). In fact a good chunk of the news we have on Israeli military activity comes from Israels YouTube propaganda site.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7809371.stm

2nd of all, if a mortar came from the school at a certain point in time, it does not give Israel the right to destroy a school later on in time. I’m quite sure that Israel is aware of the fact that mortar teams probably relocate after firing.

The destruction of the school is a blatant war crime. The UN gave Israel the coordinates of the school, the civilians inside the school had fled their homes because Israel had warned them “robocop” style that their homes were subject to bombardment. This is on top of the fact that Israel has decided to drop thousands of 2 ton bombs on the most densely populated area in the world, strafe it with machine gun fire, shell it with artillery, and bombard it from the sea. This does not even include the ground invasion. Nor does it include the illegal blockade on the territory.

You can bang your head against your computer all day but it does not change the fact that Israel is committing war crimes on an almost hourly basis. Just admit Israel fukd up, and stop blaming the victim for this massacre.

Reply

#2815

Sean

January 7, 2009 at 8:24 pm

There has never, to my knowledge, ever been any evidence that Hamas or Hezbollah uses human shields

Then you misunderstand the term. Embedding a military force within a civilian population is a war crime. Dispersing weapons amongst a civilian population is a war crime.

Israel has embedded its military bases within civilian areas and many of its “civilians” are armed to the teeth. This is only a “war crime” if it deliberately puts civilians in harms way or fails to take reasonable precautions for their safety. The locating of police stations, mosques, universities and hospitals within civilian areas is not a war crime, particularly as they are civilian installations. not military. Just because Israel claims there is a Hamas militant behind every rock doesn’t make it so.

Firing weapons from within civilian areas is a war crime. Not identifying yourself as a combatant is a war crime. Etc. Etc. Etc.

Firing weapons from a civilian area is not a war crime so long as reasonable precaution has been taken to ensure the safety of civilians in the area, usually by evacuating them. Every picture I have ever seen of Hamas militants shows them in black tops with combat fatigue bottoms. I see no evidence they are fighting in civilian clothes.

I URGE you to take Israel to the Hague. They will be cleared so fast your head will spin. I’ve studied international law for three years. Everything Israel has done is in complete compliance – in fact above the standards imposed by Geneva.

Lol. Graduated in the bottom half of class, did you? Israel has more UN resolutions lodged against it than any other nation on the planet. Ethnic cleansing, deliberate targeting of civilians, house demolitions, land confiscations, planting of settlers on conquered territory, use of cluster bombs in civilian areas, collective punishment, mass starvation, full scale economic blockade not sanctioned by the UN, wars of aggression and conquest, etc, etc, etc.

Above the standards of the Geneva Convention? Put down the crack pipe, pal.

I think you’ve forgotten when Israel makes phone calls for the residents of a home to clear it, because it is about to be bombed, Hamas often gathers mothers and their babies on the rooftops, who wave at the Israeli drones. This is the traditional definition of human shields.

No it isn’t, it is passive resistance, unless those people were forced onto the roofs by someone else. There is no evidence Hamas forced anyone to gather on the rooftops to dissuade Israeli attacks. None. If people do this of their own volition, it is foolhardy, but they have a right to passive resistance.

As for Israel’s phone calls, they make them randomly and call huge numbers of people, rendering them ineffective as a warning system but very effective as a way of spreading panic, while still allowing Israel to falsely claim it is taking measures to protect civilians.

Compounding the atmosphere of fear resulting from the Israeli bombardments, Israeli forces have been sending seemingly random telephone messages to many inhabitants of Gaza telling them to leave their homes because of imminent air strikes against their houses. Such messages have been received by residents of multi-storey apartment building, causing panic not only for those who received the calls but for all their neighbours. Such practice was widely used by Israeli forces both in Gaza and in Lebanon in 2006, but has not been reported since. The threatening calls seem to aim to spread fear among the civilian population, as in most cases no air strikes were carried out against the buildings. If this is the purpose, rather than to give effective warning, this practice violates international law and must end immediately.

http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/news/end-unlawful-attacks-and-meet-gazas-emergency-needs-20081229

And to answer your question directly, if Hamas was launching mortars from the grounds of the UN school, (that’s in itself a war crime, but not my point), they then are a legitimate target for retaliation. It doesn’t matter if they are surrounded by a hundred innocent children and one tank shell will kill everyone.

This is patently false for the reasons I’ve already mentioned of proportionality and the duty to protect civilians. A mortar is not so deadly a weapon as to justify the slaughter of hundreds of civilians to prevent its use.

Reply

#2814

praying for gaza

January 7, 2009 at 11:03 pm

Thank you Sean, Super Sayyin, etc, for the excellent analysis on Israel’s war crimes. You hit every single point with facts and clear analysis, not Israeli YouTube propaganda. It’s so hard to believe people can still give Israel a carte blanche.

Keep it up, everyone. The more people speak out, the more the world will know of Israel’s vast capability to act in inhumane ways.

Reply

#2813

Roy

January 8, 2009 at 8:17 am

There has never, to my knowledge, ever been any evidence that Hamas or Hezbollah uses human shields

Does this seem like evidence?

Reply

#2812

Roy

January 8, 2009 at 8:24 am

Israel has embedded its military bases within civilian areas and many of its “civilians” are armed to the teeth.

You misinterpreted the statement. Having civilians who are armed is not what he meant by “dispersing weapons among the civilian population.”

What he meant was using homes as weapons caches for the military. Basically, putting civilian structures to military use makes them legitimate targets.

Just because Israel claims there is a Hamas militant behind every rock doesn’t make it so.

And just because you dismiss it doesn’t mean it’s not so. Because it’s true.

Firing weapons from a civilian area is not a war crime so long as reasonable precaution has been taken to ensure the safety of civilians in the area, usually by evacuating them.

Have you seen any evidence that Hamas takes those steps? Or do you only need evidence against Hamas/for Israel? And if Hamas has taken those steps, isn’t it ok for IDF to bomb them?

Reply

#2811

Sean

January 8, 2009 at 3:21 pm

What he meant was using homes as weapons caches for the military. Basically, putting civilian structures to military use makes them legitimate targets.

Aside from their being no evidence that Hamas is doing this but Israel’s say so, civilian structures can be a legitimate target if they are being put to a military use, but only subject to the provisions I’ve already cited. You can’t just attack indiscriminately every military target with callous disregard to the the civilians who may be present.

Just because Israel claims there is a Hamas militant behind every rock doesn’t make it so.

And just because you dismiss it doesn’t mean it’s not so. Because it’s true.

Repeating your assertions over and over again does not make them true. Quoting the IDF’s often ludicrous and far fetched scenarios does not make it so, either. Where is the evidence, from a credible source, that this is happening? If you claim something is true, it is your duty to prove it, not mine to disprove it.

Firing weapons from a civilian area is not a war crime so long as reasonable precaution has been taken to ensure the safety of civilians in the area, usually by evacuating them.

Have you seen any evidence that Hamas takes those steps? Or do you only need evidence against Hamas/for Israel? And if Hamas has taken those steps, isn’t it ok for IDF to bomb them?

It is permissible for the IDF to attack Hamas in civilian areas, provided the IDF has ensured that the potential damage to civilians will not exceed the military value of the attack. The IDF frequently claims the presence of human shields whenever they kill masses of civilians attempting to blame the victims, or Hamas, for their own criminal behavior. But if Israel was really aware that Hamas was actually using human shields, they would then have a duty to refrain from attacking that target unless the military value of doing so greatly exceeded the damage done to the civilians present. I can’t think of a single instance where that was the case, and was certainly not the case in the attack against the UN school.

Reply

#2810

Roy

January 9, 2009 at 6:44 am

You can’t just attack indiscriminately every military target with callous disregard to the the civilians who may be present.

And it’s clear that Israel isn’t doing that. Although Hamas rocketers are.

Repeating your assertions over and over again does not make them true.

Right back atcha. I cite things. You complain that they’re not believable, but you don’t even cite anything to support your claims. Kind of like Hamas complaining about war crimes.

unless the military value of doing so greatly exceeded the damage done to the civilians present. I can’t think of a single instance where that was the case

It’s a judgment call, and your judgment is not what matters.

Reply

#2809

Roy

January 9, 2009 at 6:46 am

You would think that Hamas would deny that they use mosques, etc., if they didn’t use them. Any such denials?

Any explanation for the secondary explosions when such a site is hit?

I tend to agree that the school was a bad call, but I’ll also note that the school was not directly hit.

Reply

#2808

Sean

January 9, 2009 at 2:49 pm

You can’t just attack indiscriminately every military target with callous disregard to the the civilians who may be present.

And it’s clear that Israel isn’t doing that. Although Hamas rocketers are.

There has ben a large amount of evidence that israel has launched indiscriminate attacks, including videos of the massacres at police barracks, mosques and other civilian targets. Hamas has launched indisriminate attacks against civilians as well, but these attacks are not where near as lethal.

Repeating your assertions over and over again does not make them true.

Right back atcha. I cite things. You complain that they’re not believable, but you don’t even cite anything to support your claims. Kind of like Hamas complaining about war crimes.

You “cite” Israeli propaganda from the IDF, which keeps changing its story and which has made deranged claims that Hamas booby trapped the school and filled it with explosives, and it was the booby traps, not the attacks which they admitted launching, that killed the people there. Sorry, but Israel’s bullshit doesn’t pass the smell test.

You made the positive claim that Hamas was using the school for military purposes: “Actually, it would be illegal to target such a compound only if it were not being used for military purposes. That’s why Hamas is wrong for using it that way.” You have provided no proof to back your assertion and you know it. Just because you and the IDF make the positive claim Hamas was using the school to fire motars doesn’t make it so. Since you are making the positive claim that Hamas used the school grounds to fire mortars, the burden of proof is on you to prove the claim, not me. I have no burden to prove that Hamas wasn’t firing mortars from the school, because I did not make that claim. I simply stated the indsisputable fact that there is no evidence they did so, and in the absence of evidence, no reason to believe that israel is telling the truth particularly as it has a pattern of launching disproportionate attacks like these against UN targets.

I also pointed out that even if Israel is telling the truth, which is certainly possible, their attack was still indiscrimiminate and a war crime, and I cited Amnesty International’s discussion of disproportionate attacks to support my argument.

So don’t feed me this bullshit I am not supporting my claims. I have given my claims all the support they need. You have not.

Indeed, the Israeli military has admitted that there was no mortar fire coming from the school as originally claimed:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054009.html

So what does that say about all the positive claims that israel has made up to this point talking of “booby traps,” and “explosives caches” and all the rest? These claims were not misinterpretations of available evidence, which anyone could have made, but flat out lies.

unless the military value of doing so greatly exceeded the damage done to the civilians present. I can’t think of a single instance where that was the case

It’s a judgment call, and your judgment is not what matters.

Neither is yours, Sparky.

Reply

#2807

Leave a Reply