Israeli high court bans use of 'human shields'

dont forget there is still israeli occupation of the west bank... although the high court has little influence over the army's procedures.

------------------------------

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051006/ts_nm/mideast_shields_dc

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israel's army must stop using Palestinian civilians as "human shields" in operations against suspected Palestinian militants, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled on Thursday.

<snip>

Israeli troops conducting raids against wanted militants have used Palestinian non-combatants to knock on doors or enter homes of suspects. In several cases, the practice resulted in injury or death of the human shields.

An army spokesman declined comment on the ruling.

<snip>

EMPTY GESTURE. This is proof that this HAS happened and it will no doubt continue to occur.

Now, perhaps, Hamas and IJ will follow suit!!!

with an extremist paramilitary organisation? It appears that you
think the IDF & Hamas are two sides of the same coin; it appears
that you think there is no difference between the two militias?

That is very revealing.

...but it is very revealing that you are trying to do claim I am doing so.

The IDF should have never done this in the first place. It shouldn't have taken a court order. But, I don't think it is such a stretch to wish that the terrorist groups stop using their own people as shields or do you see this as a legitimate form of resistance?

then why mention them in the same post? You suggest that the
two organisations are in some way similar, that a tit-for-tat
reciprocal process should ensue, that somehow there's a linkage
between the actions of the Idf & Hamas. You're suggesting that
they are, in some way, linked, that there's some similarity.

I think you might want to remove that 'question'. Just sayin'.

I said, "perhaps they will follow suit." The only person trying to make a connection between the IDF and terrorist groups is you, but this is not a surprising revelation, just projection. OR do you think they (terrorist groups) should still continue to use human shields? It is good that Israel is not doing it any longer, but the other side should continue its use?

The only similarity is that both sides have used "human shields." Is this the connection you are talking about? Then yes, since the IDF has stopped, so should the terrorist groups. One side can no longer do this. Why is it wrong to wish the other side will follow suit?

the question is: should hamas/PA etc be held to the same standard as israel and the IDF?....if not than it makes it rather difficult to grant them a state....since such a state would in essence be a threat to those living within it, as well as those lliving next to it (obviously that is precisly what we are now seeing in gaza and in the westbank....)...

one of the reasons is that the PA never did, nor was it was never demanded of them to meet the basic standards of a society today...they had excuses made for them by their cheerleaders even before they could mention them.....

why would anyone want to try & link Hamas & the PA?

the PAs policemen brothers are in the Hamas....they're cousins are in the Islamic Jihad..they moonlight in the tanzim.....which is why it makes it difficult for abbas to "fight them"

How many Israeli ministers & government officials, & military
are related to self-styled 'radical right-wing messianists' or
are descendants of Irgun, or Lehi? If you want to criticise
the PA for links to 'terrorists', take a look behind you.

"New York Times

Murder in the Name of God
The Plot to Kill Yitzhak Rabin

By MICHAEL KARPIN and INA FRIEDMAN
Henry Holt and Company

>snip

The hard-core zealots are roughly divided into two groups: vigilantes and ideologues, those who believe in direct action and those who devote themselves to philosophizing. Among the vigilantes Amir holds in esteem is Dr. Baruch Goldstein, the physician from the settlement of Kiryat Arba, adjoining Hebron, who gunned down twenty-nine Palestinians at morning prayer in the Cave of the Patriarchs on February 25, 1994. Among the ideologues, he especially admires Noam Livnat, a tall, bearded, delicate-faced settler in his forties who walks with a heavy limp (the result of a road accident that initially left him paralyzed from the neck down). He returned to religion as a youth and became intensely pious. Today his name is well known in right-wing circles and among the national religious camp. At one point the Shabak, Israel's General Security Services, had him under surveillance. Since his sister, Limor Livnat, became a government minister in June 1996, the media have swarmed to his door. But the guarded Livnat rarely agrees to give interviews. He defines himself as a "radical right-wing messianist," and many young religious Jews regard him as a figure to be emulated. His soft voice and subdued manner stand in sharp contrast with his political image. Even right-wing radicals consider him an extremist.

http://66.249.93.104/search?q=cache:ORXtytYoIHAJ:www.nytimes.com/books/first/k/karpin-murder.html+Noam+Livnat&hl=en

How many Israeli ministers & government officials, & military
are related to self-styled 'radical right-wing messianists' or
are descendants of Irgun, or Lehi? If you want to criticise
the PA for links to 'terrorists', take a look behind you.

and this somehow relatates to the palestenain problem of brother against brother in competing terrorist organizations?......

is someone looking to relate nephews of the irgun and compare them to the Hamas, etc today?.....my my my....its getting more and more difficult to "not blame the palestenains for their own problems"......

though i'm sure many will find a way...theres always the elder of zion as a good fall back position.

Ignoring a problem doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

and comparing Limor Livnat and her brother or amir to the vast complexity that lies within the palestenians society of hundreds of families with conflicting and competing and violent groups is a bit far fetched.

and her brother was removed from gaza...reguardless of "his connection"

its ok....i understand......we wouldnt want to register a problem with the palestenain society without finding a similar one on the israeli side....we simply have to show that they really are equal.....

now about those para military groups with the palestenain society, kidnapping, assassinating, military parading, isolating homosexuals, dragging bodies in the streets, hanging from light poles,.....they're just has to be a similar set within israel...just has to be..I know..the night club shootings! yes that has to be it...the maifia..(oops half are now in jail)...no matter we simply cant compare societies using the same standard after all it might embarrase the palestenains and their cheerleaders...

actually i dont know...why shouldnt the palestenian society be held responsable for its treatment of homosexuals. for its violent behavior within?, for its dragging of bodies in the streets, for its use of human shields?

Hamas, that's fair enough. I've already said why I think they
were mentioned, the two-sides-of-a-coin thing, if you want to
ignore that, or ask rhetorical questions, then that is yer right.

You are familiar with that phrase, yes? It means comparing two different things all together. That is what you are doing. I was talking about a specific action that is carried out by BOTH sides and has now ended by one side and stated that the other side should follow suit. However, you are intent on implying that I am saying that the IDF and Hamas, et al are "two sides of the same coin," when it is clear when it is you who thinks that, and therefore, are projecting onto my statement.

Since you do not seem to know what is a rhetorical question is, the ones I asked were not. Therefore, it means I was asking what your opinion was. However your failure to answer them, is your choice.

The real irony...that people use the phrase, "you are comparing Apples and Oranges" meaning that the person is comparing two different things, but apples and oranges are both fruits! Perhaps, though, people realize that the real meaning of the phrase is to distinguish two different things all together, even if they share ONE thing in common. But, I am sure it is lost on others.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=101904&mesg_id=101989

"If you don't want to give the reason *why* you've mentioned...Hamas, that's fair enough." The IDF and Hamas, et al were using the SAME tactic of 'human shields.' This does NOT mean they are "two-sides-of-a-coin thing." However, I can see how a 'projectionist' would see that.

The article is titled: "Israeli high court bans use of 'human shields'" My response was "AWESOME!!! Now, perhaps, Hamas and IJ will follow suit!!!" However, you seem to think it is a good thing that Hamas and IJ will continue this practice. I say it "seems you think" because you won't answer the question, "OR do you think they (terrorist groups) should still continue to use human shields? It is good that Israel is not doing it any longer, but the other side should continue its use?" I, however, think they should "follow suit" even without a court order.

You may see the IDF as a terrorist organization, I do not. However, I am astute enough to see that this particular circumstance is comparable and deplorable, without thinking that both groups (the IDF and terrorist groups) are one in the same.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x101872

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Really, if you don't want to give a serious reason, or want to
continue with the absurdities, & rhetorical questions, then that's
fair enough.

Examples of rhetorical questions;

"When did you stop beating your wife?"

or

"OR do you think they (terrorist groups) should still continue to use human shields? It is good that Israel is not doing it any longer, but the other side should continue its use?"

or

" Israel is far from perfect, but what nation is? So why the extreme hate for this nation? Terrorism is always wrong, or is it? Or does it just depend on the victim?"

_________________________________________


Helpful advice on how to spot rhetorical questions (it's satire);

Mr. Gradgrind's
Literal Answers to Rhetorical Questions

People commonly ask empty rhetorical questions that rarely receive any sort of sensible answer. When you have had your surfeit of poetical whimsy and are ready for some good, hard facts, come here to be set straight.

The world would be much improved if those engaging in windy musings were more often brought up short by a nice, sharp definition or a pointed rebuke. Even the fantastical William Shakespeare, asking himself "Shall I compare thee to a Summer's day?" goes on (admittedly at excessive length) to list a number of reasons for answering in the negative.

Of course, some questions are so ill-framed as to admit of no sensible answer. Example: Where have you been all my life? It so happens that this question has never been addressed to me; but if it were I should be at a loss to detail the many addresses at which I have resided and worked during the span of existence of some other person, even if I knew that person's precise date of birth. Such idle musings are best ignored.

However, one can learn much by discovering facts that provide satisfactory answers to questions one might suppose at first glance to be pointless. This page is devoted to the pursuit of such answers.

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/gradgrind.html

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I refuse to try continue this. The action condemned in Israel should be condemned everywhere. The ONE action, using "human shields," should cease to exist as a weapon by terrorist groups. Saying that practice should discontinue is NOT comparing the bodies doing it, EXCEPT FOR the actual practice of it.

"Democrats say they will not engage in "mudslinging!" AWESOME!!! Maybe the Republican party will follow suit!"

You're dealing in absurdities, are completely ignoring anything
I've said in this entire thread, & again suggesting that there's
a linkage between the Idf & Hamas, that they are similar groups,
that there's some corresponding characteristics between the two -
I'll translate the eg you've given;

--One organisation say they won't do Bad Things!! Awesome!! Maybe another organisation, of the same type, but the opposite of the 1st group, will follow!!--

Have you heard of the saying;

"When you're in a hole, stop digging".

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Israeli high court bans military use of Palestinians as human shields

Chris McGreal in Jerusalem
Friday October 7, 2005
The Guardian

The Israeli high court yesterday ruled that the army's long-standing practice of using Palestinian civilians as human shields in combat is illegal under international law. It said the military's claim to have amended the procedure to allow civilians to "volunteer" to work with the army was still unacceptable because it was unlikely anyone would freely do so.

"You cannot exploit the civilian population for the army's military needs, and you cannot force them to collaborate," said the Israeli chief justice, Aharon Barak. "Based on this principle, we rule it illegal to use civilians as human shields."

>snip

How they've been deployed

The Israeli army used Palestinian civilians as human shields in a variety of combat situations:

· Forcing them to enter the homes of wanted men to tell them to surrender, or ordering them to enter suspected booby-trapped buildings

· Placing civilians between troops and hostile crowds to discourage stone-throwing or shooting

· Troops standing behind a Palestinian and then firing over the civilian's shoulder during combat

· Palestinian families locked into a room after the army commandeered their homes as military posts, to discourage militants from attacking

· Civilians ordered to pick up suspected bombs on roads

More at;
Guardian Unlimited

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3151626,00.html

'Human shield' procedure employed to protect the lives of soldiers, IDF sources say. 'The IDF continues to be moral and act morally,' source says

<snip>

"The IDF does not wish to endanger the lives of innocent civilians, but sometimes the circumstances require actions taken to protect the lives of soldiers, army sources said Thursday in response to the High Court's decision to ban the so-called "neighborly help procedure."

The High Court ruled that the procedure, whereby Palestinian civilians are sent to knock on the doors of wanted terror suspects and ask them to surrender – is illegal. The IDF has yet to issue an official response to the decision."


"Neighborly help procedure?"

:rofl:

the patrol in the field has two options:
send a palestenain to knock on the door and tell the guys in side what their options are....

option 2.shoot up the house before entering while shooting, possibly killing all in side.

option 3, raid the house at night....scaring everyone inside to "death" and not always productive

option 4...using a loud speaker which has cause riots in the past and requires a lot more resources..

(option 5 of an idf soldier going to the door and politely knocking is not going to happen.

__________________________


the US and brit forces use option 2 and 3..guess its back to tha old standard.

Guess i should add that i've never been in the position of "using or not using palestenains"...and would not want to be. Moral questions that also involve your own life are not easily answered in the field...and for those who have such high moral values..i suspect few have ever had them actually tested...(they go from black and white to gray real fast)

(tons of thanks to Englander for providing this)

How they've been deployed

The Israeli army used Palestinian civilians as human shields in a variety of combat situations:

· Forcing them to enter the homes of wanted men to tell them to surrender, or ordering them to enter suspected booby-trapped buildings

· Placing civilians between troops and hostile crowds to discourage stone-throwing or shooting

· Troops standing behind a Palestinian and then firing over the civilian's shoulder during combat

· Palestinian families locked into a room after the army commandeered their homes as military posts, to discourage militants from attacking

· Civilians ordered to pick up suspected bombs on roads

More at;
Guardian Unlimited

-----------------------------------------------------
Yeah, just like you said...:eyes:

Also, if you think for one second that this will not continue with little restraint, you are patently wrong.

6 October 2005: Court Forbids Use of Human Shields

This morning, the Israeli High Court of Justice ruled that it is illegal to use Palestinian civilians in military operations. The decision was handed down in response to a petition filed in 2002 by a coalition of human rights organizations.

IDF soldiers have used Palestinian civilians as human shields since the beginning of the current intifada. This practice is most common during IDF operations carried out in Palestinian population centers "such as Operation Defensive Shield." Soldiers pick a civilian at random and force him to protect them by doing dangerous tasks. For example, soldiers have ordered Palestinians to:

* enter buildings to check if they are booby-trapped, or to remove the occupants
* remove suspicious objects from roads
* stand inside houses where soldiers have set up military positions, so that Palestinians will not fire at the soldiers
* walk in front of soldiers to shield them from gunfire, while the soldiers hold a gun behind their backs and sometimes fire over their shoulders.

On May 5, 2002 seven human rights organizations petitioned the court against the use of Palestinians as human shields. The State informed the court that "the IDF decided to issue an order to its forces forbidding all use of civilians as human shields to protect against shooting or attacks by Palestinians." Yet, the State said that the IDF said it would continue to have Palestinian civilians assist soldiers in the framework of the "neighbor procedure." According to this procedure, "Palestinian civilians assist soldiers in entering the houses of other Palestinians during the course of military operations." The State claimed that such "assistance" did not constitute using the civilians as human shields, though "the IDF specified that even this use of civilians is forbidden in cases in which the commander in the field believes that there may be physical danger to the civilian."

Following a subsequent petition filed by the human rights organizations, the court issued a temporary injunction forbidding the use of the "neighbor procedure." Yet, B'Tselem and other human rights organizations continued to document cases in which the IDF violated the court's order. In August 2002, Nidal Abu Mukhsan was killed by Palestinian gunfire while being used by IDF soldiers as a human shield.

In July 2003, the Court narrowed the temporary injunction, and allowed the use of a new procedure entitled the “prior warning procedure," in which Palestinian civilians may be used to assist soldiers if they volunteer to do so. In today's decision, the Court ruled that the IDF's use of the “prior warning procedure" is illegal, as is all use of Palestinian civilians in military operations.

The true test of this ruling will be its implementation, particularly in light of the IDF's violation of the Court's interim injunction. The IDF must now ensure that all soldiers in the field are informed that it is absolutely forbidden to use civilians to perform military tasks.

http://www.btselem.org/English/Human_Shields/20051006_HCJ_Ruling.asp

and have no argument with btselem...in this case.....but there is a down side...the soldiers in the field will probably be quicker to shoot....

That IDF will actually heed these orders? Quite a heck of a lot to 1.

Israel army to fight human shield ban -

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x102207