Omar Baddar & Jeff Robbins debate Israel's assault on Gaza -- Part 1 (of 8)

Omar Baddar debates Jeff Robbins (former US delegate to the UN Human Rights Commission under the Clinton administration) on Israel's 2008/9 assault on Gaza (operation Cast Lead). The debate was moderated by Joshua Rubenstein, Amnesty International's North-East regional Director in the US. The debate was hosted by Lesley University in Cambridge, Massachusetts; sponsored by the Lesley University chapter of Amnesty International; and taped by the Arabic Hour: www.arabichour.org

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Omar
• Baddar
• Gaza
• Israel
• Debate
• War
• Crimes
• Amnesty
• International
• Human
• Rights
• Watch
• Civilians
• Shields
• IDF
• Jeff
• Robbins
• Joshua
• Rubenstein

[andersbra]

@ombaddar0, CAMERA (dot) org articles use hard facts. You try to imply that they distort the facts, but your statements lack proofs! What you would label 'credible media' is regularly found containing many errors -and many ignore to correct even after CAMERA points them out - by the research of CAMERA. I study both sources. The IDF forbids what the soldiers you mention did, so you can't use that as an example to describe the IDF.

[omarbaddar0]

@andersbra - if you bother watch the debate you're commenting on, you'll see that the IDF threw a fit when the Supreme Court banned the use of human shields (a recent ban I might add). So what you have is the Israeli military on record arguing in favor of using human shields, you have Israeli soldiers getting convicted of using human shields, and you have eye-witness testimony documented by independent human rights organizations of the extensive use of it. Consider acknowledging reality.

[andersbra]

@omarbaddar0 I recommend

the ‘Op-ed: Should IDF be allowed to use Arab civilians in order to minimize risk to soldiers?’ on Ynet [just Google it] by Yoaz Hendel. BBC wrote an article ‘IDF to appeal human shield ban’ [2005] and Shaul Mofaz reasons are reasonable. The reader of this post must read the articles and not assume anything, to understand what IDF endorsed at that time. Part 1 of 2

[omarbaddar0]

@andersbra - for the record, you started with saying that there is no proof that the IDF used human shields in Gaza. When I presented you w/ the record, you said it didn't reflect on the IDF because they were outlaws & were prosecuted. When I presented you w/ the IDF arguing in favor of the policy, you said their reasons were reasonable. As such, there is no winning with you. & if you want to believe that one propaganda outlet is more credible than every human rights org in the world, feel free.

[andersbra]

@meshzzizk : You are quoting the Goldstone-report, which has been proven to contain many errors by the research published on CAMERA (dot) org.

There are no proofs whatsoever of Israeli soldiers using human shields in Gaza.

Yes, Hamas von the election. The people of Gaza – choose by their own free will to vote in Gaza. This shows that the majority of the people of Gaza support Hamas terrorism against civilians.

[omarbaddar0]

@andersbra --

"no proofs whatsoever of Israeli soldiers using human shields in Gaza"

Compare that to the headline appearing in one of Israel's leading papers, Ha'aretz, just a couple of months ago which reads "IDF soldiers convicted of using 11-year-old as human shield in Gaza" (look it up). You would do well to spend less time on propaganda outlets like CAMERA & more time reading actual facts from credible outlets.

[andersbra]

To claim that all human rights org. has an anti-Israel bias is simply not correct; and distorting facts-as documentation proves many have done- is the antithesis to human rights. The distortion of facts by many 'human rights organisations' is documented - hard facts - on e.g. CAMERA and 'NGO Monitor' [Google them]. Israeli army is of course not perfect, but they are taught to do their best to avoid civilian causalties. Part 2 of 2

[andersbra]

@omarbaddar0 : Different definitions of human shields are used. The two persons you mentioned were prosecuted and acted against the IDF-poilcy. To my knowledge, Shaul Mofaz didn’t endorse such incidents in 2005 either. The reader of this article must read the articles I referred to in order to understand the difference. Once again CAMERA (dot) org presents facts without distortions-the reader can and is recommended to research it by himself/herself. Part 1 of 2

[andersbra]

@omarbaddar0 You are talking about 'eye-witness reports' from persons in Gaza voting in the Hamas-terror regime and not putting a finger to stop Hamas terrorists-attacks. How can you know they are credible?

’Independent human rights organizations’: The bias and distorted ‘facts’ of many of these organisations are debunked by facts on CAMERA (dot) org