Red Cross attacks exile of Palestinians

May 24, 2002 5:17 AM

Red Cross attacks exile of Palestinians Mr Fisk (in occupied Lebanon) notes that the Red Cross believes it cruel to separate known terrorists from their families. Neglects to note that all international law opposes the targeting of civilians no matter what the reason or rationalization used. Perhaps a lawsuit for "cruel and unusual" punishment might allow the terrorists to have family reunions and be compensated for emotional damages and deprivation of marital privileges.
posted by Postroad (11 comments total)

These guys are defending their country from an illegal occupation. It isn't terrorism.
posted by Mondo at 7:02 AM on May 24, 2002

I actually laughed out loud at how polarized the initial and first posts in this thread are, nice job guys.

How about we look at another version of the story? here we go, from the AP.

Now let's look at the full quote:
"Under international humanitarian law, transfers are illegal," said Vincent Lusser, spokesman for the International Committee of the Red Cross.

However, "we welcome the fact that the standoff at the Church of the Nativity is over," Lusser told The Associated Press. "We're well aware of the situation in which it happened — it was a deadlock — and think the solution found was probably better for the people concerned."

So, he points out its not allowed under the geneva convention, but thinks its probably the best solution in this situation, and he hopes its temporary -- what an attack, eh?
posted by malphigian at 7:19 AM on May 24, 2002

"Known terrorists?" According to who, Postroad? The Israelis? Gee-zus. If they say it, it must be so? (Like the papers "proving" Arafat's connection to terror, which the US itself said do NOT provide the supposedly incontrovertible link the Israelis claimed.) At least make the attempt to be a bit more discerning, Postroad...you'll look a lot better.
posted by mapalm at 7:53 AM on May 24, 2002

I don't know mapalm. I was quite impressed by the reports distributed with the evidence connecting Yasser to terrorism. When the TV guys showed their clips of flipping pages I could tell they went top dollar at kinkos. Full colour pictures of badguys with minimal color bleed. Poor choice of binding though. Everyone knows the truth isn't found in duo-tangs. It should be at least coil or comb binding.
posted by srboisvert at 8:15 AM on May 24, 2002

vbfg believes it cruel to seperate people from their families, cites lack of trial, the basic human right of self defence and a distaste for the kind of banishment from the kingdom available to all citizens of the middle ages as reason.
posted by vbfg at 9:06 AM on May 24, 2002

Terrorism: the targetting of civilians to instil "terror". It seems the shoe fits for all concerned. Maybe it's time to just drop the "terrorist" word as it is meaningless.

Orwell is vindicated.
posted by Mondo at 9:39 AM on May 24, 2002

Ok, Maypalm: try this http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0lou0 and that is but one of the group. Now what is a terrorist? according to any and all definistions that are accepted world-wide it is the purseful singling out of civilians to kill and or maim them. And that means even if such folks consider what they are doing in defense of some objective they deem important. Israel, before statehood, had terror groups, and references to them are still to Terror.
The IDF could with ease sent in lots of tear gas and emptied the place and put on trial those they felt deserved trail. They did not. In fact they allowed these very much wanted lads to go free....now that is compromise, and trying not to upset the moral values the world holds so dear. Your notion seems to be that doing what you want is ok ilf you feel your cause is "just." That being the case, do you believe that the Trade Towers mass murder of 3 thousand people ok because the suicide guys believed they were involved in a just cause? Yes or no?
posted by Postroad at 10:13 AM on May 24, 2002

Postroad:

I refuse to respond to arguments that bring up 9/11. They are specious at best.

But using your definition of terrorism, let's take a look at the testimony and evidence which shows that Israeli soldiers deliberately target civilians:

Physicians for Human Rights.

See also, Btselem and Human Rights Watch.

Or read this first hand account (excerpt: "I sit in the shade of a palm-roofed hut on the edge of the dunes, momentarily defeated by the heat, the grit, the jostling crowds, the stench of the open sewers and rotting garbage. A friend of Azmi's brings me, on a tray, a cold glass of tart, red carcade juice."

"Barefoot boys, clutching kites made out of scraps of paper and ragged soccer balls, squat a few feet away under scrub trees. Men in flowing white or gray galabias -- homespun robes -- smoke cigarettes in the shade of slim eaves. Two emaciated donkeys, their ribs protruding, are tethered to wooden carts with rubber wheels."

"It is still. The camp waits, as if holding its breath. And then, out of the dry furnace air, a disembodied voice crackles over a loudspeaker."

""Come on, dogs," the voice booms in Arabic. "Where are all the dogs of Khan Younis? Come! Come!""

"I stand up. I walk outside the hut. The invective continues to spew: "Son of a bitch!" "Son of a whore!" "Your mother's cunt!""

"The boys dart in small packs up the sloping dunes to the electric fence that separates the camp from the Jewish settlement. They lob rocks toward two armored jeeps parked on top of the dune and mounted with loudspeakers. Three ambulances line the road below the dunes in anticipation of what is to come."

"A percussion grenade explodes. The boys, most no more than ten or eleven years old, scatter, running clumsily across the heavy sand. They descend out of sight behind a sandbank in front of me. There are no sounds of gunfire. The soldiers shoot with silencers. The bullets from the M-16 rifles tumble end over end through the children's slight bodies. Later, in the hospital, I will see the destruction: the stomachs ripped out, the gaping holes in limbs and torsos."

"Yesterday at this spot the Israelis shot eight young men, six of whom were under the age of eighteen. One was twelve. This afternoon they kill an eleven-year-old boy, Ali Murad, and seriously wound four more, three of whom are under eighteen. Children have been shot in other conflicts I have covered -- death squads gunned them down in El Salvador and Guatemala, mothers with infants were lined up and massacred in Algeria, and Serb snipers put children in their sights and watched them crumple onto the pavement in Sarajevo -- but I have never before watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport."

Don't feed me crap about "moral values."
posted by mapalm at 10:46 AM on May 24, 2002

I have read any number of reports that turned out to be nonsense. That said, I don't for a moment doubt that a good deal of "bad" has been done to civilians (where is the military among the Palestinians?). Have you ever been in a war zone? I have.
I am not sure why 9/11 is specious. After all, many Muslims woprldwide are anti-Amreica because they want us out of the region and think of us as infidels. Ok, then look to Ireland and the blowing up of pubs etc...that is also "for a just cause" and against civilians.
This is not to say that I believe that Israel is morally good and perfgect and the Palestinians are not. That would be a criminal statement, nearly. But if the Palestinians want statehood then they are going to have to silt down and hammer out an agreement with Israel; and If Israel wants peace for pizza places, they too will have to sit down and hammer out an agreement.
Now, Arafat, if he is to be believed, says he abhors terrorism , or, if you like, the killling of civilians, but Hamas, Fatha, The Brigade, Hezbollah have said they will not stop bombing....if you now go back and read the UN madante, it calls for secure and peacefrul co-eistence with mutual recognition of all parties. Israel, like it or not, is not about to leave land taken from Jordan and Egypt (not from the Palestinians) untill there is a peace agreement. No country give up land taken in war unless for a strategic reason or because a peace accord signed. None. Ever.
posted by Postroad at 3:24 PM on May 24, 2002

"Nonsense"? Physicians for Human Rights, Amnesty, Btselem...and a first-hand account that has not been refuted: all nonsense? Oh, wouldn't that be convenient, Posty. But alas, it's all true.
posted by mapalm at 3:45 PM on May 24, 2002

A noble cause, indeed. And yet, sadly, the people behind this noble cause choose to fight by blowing up babies in pizza parlors.

And, shockingly, some people like the baby-blower-uppers better.
posted by dhartung at 1:36 AM on May 25, 2002