|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Doug's Workshop wrote:
Apparently, the Security Council of Israel met about it yesterday. I'd rather wait and see what the Israeli claims are before digging through a post by a guy who claims he spent all of last year out of his right mind.
Anything juicy over at Prison Planet or FrontPage?
Story making the rounds on the other side:
You'll notice that, like most Zionists who come uncomfortably close to fascism, the blogger is from New York.
U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
Doug's Workshop wrote:
I like the other article on that website wherein the author relates how he was scammed out of $40,000 because he suffers from a variety of mental disorders and is gullible.
Mark Sweetman wrote:
Lastly for clarity - I think that both the common Israeli and common Palestinian are helpless victims.
Comrade workers of Israel and Palestine!
You are not helpless victims!
You have the power to explode this Zionist garrison state from within, sparking off international proletarian socialist revolution throughout the region and freeing the various peoples of the Middle East from the rule of the murderous mullahs, sinister sheiks, callous colonels and, um, (I can't think of an adjective that starts with "Z") Zionists!
For workers revolution!
Arab, Beta, Ashkenazi, Druze
Muslim, Jewish, Black, White,
Although, after reading through Citizen Aranna's linked website, and, in particular, the article attacking Glenn Beck from the right for wanting to provide "Christian humanitarianism" to the Central American border refugees, I felt like I was justified and considered withdrawing the apology.
But manners are getting the better of me, so I will not.
Again, not a weapons systems kinda nerd, but I guess crazy left-wing Israelis aren't the only ones saying Iron Dome is overrated:
Anyway, I was bopping around the Communist Party of Israel's website and they have one of those bloggy things where there is a subject index with all the words in a column and you click, say, "Conscientious Objector" or "Histradut" and one of them said "Arab-Bedoiun". And I remembered "Bedoiun" being one of the categories in the IDF refuseniks article I posted above.
"Huh," I said. "Wassup?" asked Omar the Arab Trade Union Organizer. "Well, I thought I knew what 'Bedoiun' meant, but what does it mean in the Israeli context?" "You don't know about the Bedouin?" "No." "Basically, they sold out the rest of the Palestinians a long, long time ago. Like there's been Bedouin IDF generals or something. And they got shiznit on."
Haven't yet found an article laying out the whole history, so maybe Comrade Omar is biased, but I did wonder if the experience of the Bedouin might have some lessons for American apologists for Zionism who indignantly demand to know whether there is any faction of the Palestinians who recognize working with Israel as a better option.
Smarnil le couard wrote:
Dear Comrade le Couard, I wasn't referring to Mali, nor you, because, until now, you hadn't participated in this thread.
But, yes, I yelled about that, too.
The president of the state of Palestine wrote a book about how the Nazi and Zionists were in league with each other.
That was an interesting page. It led me to this one.
During Pillar of Ash, I was totally down with the apartheid analogy and then I read an article on David Horowitz's site (Marx only knows why) or something and stopped using it. Recently, I ran across a youtube video for the Israeli Apartheid Week that was held earlier this year. In it, they claim they are applying the label according to the UN definition of apartheid. I, again, am too lazy to dig through UN documents and rely on wikipedia where I get
"It defined the crime of apartheid as 'inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them.'"
Anyone else got anything?
Yes, I didn't really grasp what Citizen Sweetman was saying earlier (as I said, this is a dense thread) but after listening to Rabbi Siegman about the "mind-boggling hypocrisy" (maybe a paraphrase), I am pretty much done listening to any American apologists for Zionism, fake leftie or otherwise.
That being said, I posted out of an emotional response to listening to Rabbi Siegman. I am not any more pro-Hamas than I was before. I'm just more anti-Zionist.
Well, on a sad note, my grammie died last night.
No tears, though. [Sobs] Ninety-six years old, she beat the Depression, she helped beat Hitler, she beat my philandering, degenerate gambling grandfather, less praiseworthy, she also beat the shiznit out of her kids, but, uh, what do you expect from goblins?
Most importantly, as a lifelong despiser of leeches and takers, she died before her bank accounts ran out. Even in the depths of deepest dementia, I knew, my grandmother would never tolerate living on welfare.
Former Executive Director of the American Jewish Congress for almost 20 years on Gaza, fleeing Hitler and the '48 war.
Looks like it should be interesting.
Arturius Fischer wrote:
I don't think the CNN reporter who called it "complicated" has been posting in here, have they?
Anyway, placing weapons in schools may be illegal, immoral, etc., etc., etc., but I still don't see it as using "human shields" under any legal definition that has thus far been presented. Which is what I was talking about in the post quoted.
I don't know where you're from Citizen Slaunyeh--I've always had the sense that you were European of some sort but maybe that's because you used to have the same avatar as someone else--but the propaganda machine of the United States is so one-sided, so selective of what they report, so misleading on many things, that people can come into a thread about the horrors of what is going on in Ukraine and declare that one side is completely evil because they, according to the American press, bragged about shooting down a civilian airliner and looted it while laughing.
Not only that, but they went from being evil rebels to American media boogieman phrase of choice "terrorists" in the space of about three posts.
I know the Russian media is just as bad. I know the Russian government is just as bad. I know the pro-Russian separatist leadership in Luhansk and Donetsk are just as bad as the, yes, fascist-infested Ukrainian army and government.
Shooting down a civilian airliner while under the false understanding that it is a military plane is a tragic, but, alas, not terribly unique phenomenon. The differing ways the stories are reported depending on who did it is a source of endless fascination for me and, I hope, a relevant topic.
But, as an American, although not a proud one, I cringe when I read posts like that and worry about what non-Americans think about us.
However, I apologize for being mean and snarky to you, Citizen Aranna. I don't know you, unlike the rest of the imperialist running-dog stooges in here, and it was rude and unhelpful.
Really, that's the best you've got?
Have fun discussing the differing alignments of Putin, Kerry, the right-wing pro-Russian separatists and the right-wing Ukrainian government.
Thank you, Citizen Spawn, I never would have known that AJ was a biased purveyor of Qatari (Qatarish?) propaganda if you hadn't told me.
I found a, hopefully, non-Islamist nor non-Qatari propaganda source that covers the same ground for those who would like to investigate further. I'm not quite sure what city this Telegraph from, so I'm guessing London.
Anyway, it'll be interesting to make a first point in 2017, one hundred year after the revolution to see how Russia advanced over that time.
Yes, it will be interesting to note how far the living standards of the ex-Soviet working class has fallen since the counterrevolution of '91, how far they have regressed in issues of women's rights and all the other indexes (indices?) of social progress.
I mean, sure, they aren't ruled by a bunch of authoritarian, tyrannical bureaucrats anymore, but...
Good guys? Obviously not. Assuming what you say is true the US was tactless and arrogant in the extreme. But unless they went in laughing and looted the valuables from the wreckage of the downed Iranian airliner I would not say evil.
Ah, so what tips them from CN to CE is the laughing and looting. Got it.
It's kind of amazing how many non-Hamas people are cited as examples of Hamas using human shields in that article.
No expert, as I've said, but I follow the link on Popular Resistance Committees, and I find that they are a separate faction, third in size after Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
The PFLP (GC), of course, are also not Hamas.
The Human Rights Watch press release about their previous press release about the PRC is worth linking, I think:
Pro-Russian separatists brag about shooting down a Ukrainian military plane, discover it is a civilian airliner, cover their asses: evil incarnate.
The United States shoots down an Iranian airliner, refuses to apologize and awards the commander of the Vincennes the Legion of Merit: good guys?
Btw, I read in an unrelated article by some lifelong leftie muckraker that al-Jazeera broadcast a documentary earlier this year "proving" (in the muckraker's words) that the Pan Am 103 bombing was carried out not by Libya, but by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (General Command) at the beshest of the Islamic Republic of Iran in revenge for the shooting down of Iran Air Flight 655.
Well, I'm almost there, but not quite.
Red Cross cites "Third Geneva Convention (with respect to prisoners of war), the Fourth Geneva Convention (with respect to protected civilians) and Additional Protocol I (with respect to civilians in general)" as the source of the legal definition of "human shields."
They also summarize the following:
Definition of human shields
The prohibition of using human shields in the Geneva Conventions, Additional Protocol I and the Statute of the International Criminal Court are couched in terms of using the presence (or movements) of civilians or other protected persons to render certain points or areas (or military forces) immune from military operations. Most examples given in military manuals, or which have been the object of condemnations, have been cases where persons were actually taken to military objectives in order to shield those objectives from attacks. The military manuals of New Zealand and the United Kingdom give as examples the placing of persons in or next to ammunition trains. There were many condemnations of the threat by Iraq to round up and place prisoners of war and civilians in strategic sites and around military defence points. Other condemnations on the basis of this prohibition related to rounding up civilians and putting them in front of military units in the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia and Liberia.
In the Review of the Indictments in the Karadžić and Mladić case, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia qualified physically securing or otherwise holding peacekeeping forces against their will at potential NATO air targets, including ammunition bunkers, a radar site and a communications centre, as using “human shields”.
It can be concluded that the use of human shields requires an intentional co-location of military objectives and civilians or persons hors de combat with the specific intent of trying to prevent the targeting of those military objectives.
I'm getting tired, so I may be getting sloppy, but I don't see how hiding rockets in a vacant school is "using the presence (or movements) of civilians or other protected persons to render certain points or areas (or military forces) immune from military operations." I mean, how are you rendering a point immune from military operations if you're hiding rockets there?
I don't know. Maybe I'm descending into sophistry, but I have a cynical suspicion that international law is all about sophistry.
"In Germany, the law does not permit the issue of shares for less than one thousand marks denomination, and the magnates of German finance look with an envious eye at England, where the issue of one-pound shares ( = 20 marks, about 10 rubles) is permitted."
--V.I. Lenin, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism: A Popular Outline
Citizen Fischer wrote:
Hmmm. I can work with that. Let's break it down.
Type 1: Placement of non-combatants around combat targets to deter enemy from attacking those targets.
Comrade Anklebiter writes:
Actually, whether or not that is Hamas's modus operandi is pretty much what is under contention.
For example, here is the first article that gets spit out of my search engine when I look for "Hamas" and "human shields":
As I've said before, no expert here, just a dude who loads trucks who happens to be a lifelong communist with a passing interest in world affairs and a search engine, but, if the case was as clear as many seem to think, then I have a hard time understanding why CNN reports that it is "complicated" or that they've got someone from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (which sounds like a plutocrat thing to me, but I could be wrong) saying "It would be impossible at this point to say how much truth there is to the human shield argument." I'm sure there's a CAMERA article or Breitbart report that claims otherwise, but I find it hard to believe either of them are purveyors of Islamist propaganda.
Arturius Fischer wrote:
I noticed that one of the dudes cited in the Islamist propaganda piece above made a distinction between careless endangering of civilians and "human shields."
I go looking for the UN definition of "human shields," but got bored and settled for wikipedia.
"Human shield is a military and political term describing the deliberate placement of non-combatants in or around combat targets to deter the enemy from attacking these targets. It may also refer to the use of persons to literally shield combatants during attacks, by forcing them to march in front of the soldiers. A third meaning is when a combatant holds another person in front of them to shield them from projectiles (usually bullets), often by holding then in a headlock or nelson hold."
Anyone else got anything?
Lord Snow wrote:
I've been chatting with my friend,
Lord Snow wrote:
I am sorry that you think I am cheating.
You ask me what I would do if I was a kid in a uniform. When I was 18 I was the (not very good) organizer for the Boston Spartacus Youth Club.
If you were to ask me what I would do if I was someone other than myself, then I'd say I'd probably behave like any other scared kid given a weapon and told to go kill other people with weapons who are trying to kill me. Which, if anything I've ever read in the last twenty years is any indication, is often not very well.
And then I would refer you to Comrade Jeff's reply, particularly the second part.
Kingpinmaker, Game N
The party spent the next couple of days aboard The Whale sailing back to Blackcove. We looked up all of the rules for using ballistas and cannons, and the players had fun assigning NPCs to each of the weapons, counting their money, and identifying their magic goodies.
Somewhere in there, Giles O. Beck and Esmerelda Bandawax, out of the kindness of their good, good hearts, offered a home to Toby and Jillian Poodlecock as cook and groundskeeper at the Foxglove Manor, helping keep up the illusion [stifles giggle] that the house is haunted. What else? More role-playing with, for example, Barbie Ragnarock spying on Symoreel Singha having a lesbian encounter with Princess Mwangli and getting secret instruction about retrieving "The Heart of the Jungle" from The Mack Daddy's guildhall, the consolation of Urzzak's young apprentice who was moved to throw his mask into the waves and be adopted into the Jambala Jaeg, Buck Rogers telling Genny that if she wanted to make contact with the Bellflower Network she'd have to find a contact in Pezzack named "Doodlebug," etc., etc.
After the appropriate amount of time, boom! the player up in the crow's nest (I forget who) sees a great fin break the water. Boo-yah! A megaladon! Genny's player shot me a dirty look, because he had been talking about megaladons before the game began, but I swear, I already had it planned before he brought it up.
Anyway, it was a pretty fun fight and the reason it was so fun was it so fast! Megaladon attacks, Captain takes evasive manuevers, Megaladon eats poor Umja, the players unload their sparkling new toys into Megaladon, repeat once, Megaladon is blown to shreds and slinks back into the deep waters with single digit hit points. Huzzah!
Couple of days later, they arrive in the waters off of Blackcove assuming the worst. They pass by the Magical Island of Nas-Kashel and see rowboats beached by the Wedding Rock. "Oh no, how did the zombies use rowboats?!?" The party gets in their dinghy and heads out to investigate. Genny sees a woman's face, transclucent and shimmery, peek out of the waves. Players freak out. Two nixies rise up out of the water, set to charm. Esmerelda gets to go first, though, and cheats with her Bardic Knowledge ability again. "They're nixies" I say, "And you remember that Lira Sauvuren, the Blackcove town druid, was friends with nixies and all kinds of ocean creatures." The party starts parleying, drops Lira's name, the nixies relax, "What are you doing in The Whale?" they ask. "Oh you know The Whale?" "Of course we know The Whale, big old galley with a penisbone masthead, owned by The Mack Daddy, everyone under the seas knows The Whale." Anyway, they're lucky they have Esmerelda around, because I had augmented the nixies with an oceanid, and I bet I could have drowned at least one of them.
Anyway, they return to Blackcove, find out that it was not turned into a plague zombie infestation town--it turns out Gerlach the Fishman Sorcerer has learned to control the undead, hmmm--break the bad news about the death of "Lord Urzzak", get a tour of all the new construction that has gone on since they were gone, particularly the new temple of Rovagug (!!!), Barbie Ragnarock is reunited with poor Sven who is a mess of scars and blind in one eye (he quickly forgave her and the two retired to get better reacquainted) and are told there will be a feast tonight in the memory of Urzzak and Barnacle Bettye. Bunch of other unsettling stuff, night falls, feast starts, party, party, party, Gerlach stands up, clears his fishy throat, makes a moving speech about the recent history of the town and the heroism of Lord Urzzak, and, to finish, yells out "Bring in the sacrifice!"
"What?!?" says the party in unison, as the villagers break out an In Darkest Africa-style drum circle and Lira Sauvuren leads in a manacled Chelish tax collector! "Death to Cheliax! Long live Rovagug!" the villagers chant. The party freaks out, much roleplaying and Diplomacy ("But Lord Urzzak said live like a Chelish pig, die like Chelish pig..." "I don't care what he said, you can't sacrifice tax collectors to Rovagug! Don't you think somebody will notice when the tax collector goes missing?!?"), etc. Everyone decides that maybe Blackcove isn't a good place for the ex-slaves to stay, grab the poor tax collector, and head back to The Whale.
After that, they headed back to Pezzack and got attacked by another bunch of strix. These strix, though, had four seventh-level characters among them, but, the party kicked their butts pretty soundly. It was a pretty cool fight, with cannons and flying combatants, but I am afraid I don't recall most of the cool details. Suffice to say, after years of playing together, I think the party is finally starting to cohere into a lean, mean, semi-tactical D&D playing machine. Huzzah!
Game ends with The Whale a day's sail away from Pezzack.
Giles! What are you doing here?!? Um [looks around to make sure the house is in order], wow, you were here on Thursday?
That only reinforces how negligent I have been in posting. :(
You're right about the manacled pirate, of course. I had remembered that over the weekend but forget to come and correct my post.
Genny can't come to this weekend's game, alas, and I'm not sure about Symoreel quite yet. I'll send you an invisible messenger soon.
Anyway, here's that list I was talking about:
Starting with the Princess, we're talking about Mwangi humans, somewhere around Mobutoo or Umja we grade down to Mwangi halfling, and by the time we get to Gillis and Barley, we're talking Chelish halflings, the last two an elderly married couple.
Because Hamas has absolutely no reason to lie about committing war crimes, amIright?
"Look, I am not a fan of Hamas. You can look through my post record in this thread and the one Lord Snow started last time.It wouldn't surprise me if they did use human shields; at the same time, I'm not just going to accept the word of you, Lord Snow or, particularly, Doug's Workshop."
Hmm, I wonder what that might mean.
How about defining the word "close to" as relates to both Israel and to Hamas?
I checked out the Amnesty International report linked in the article, and, upon cursory examination, I don't see those words anywhere on the page. I google the quote, find it cited by other sources, including Agent France Presse and wikipedia, but still can't find the report that actually says those words. I leave it other googlers to find it because I have to go to work soon.
Regardless, you acknowledge that Israel has designated military targets and non-military targets, where as Hamas does not.
I don't recall acknowledging any such thing. If you are referring to something in the piece that you quoted, I would point out that Hessam Akhlaghpour wrote it, not I.