This is a blatant war crime.......

[AntivaxHunters]

Article here via The Economist
[link:https://archive.ph/7IgHs|]

Link to tweet

[maxsolomon]

1. Friedman was saying this morning in the NYT that Israel

is playing by the rules of the neighborhood.

[jimfields33]

2. Good. Let's sort it out at the end of this with an investigation and not Twitter.

[ZonkerHarris]

48. Interesting take of yours to support murdering prisoners. That means it's okay for both sides right?

[jimfields33]

50. Your sentence is unreadable. There's something missing.

[ZonkerHarris]

53. fixed

[SickOfTheOnePct]

55. Where is

The purported video? And has it been confirmed ?

[jimfields33]

60. Thank you. No I don't condone it at all.

What they will need to do is investigate the charges and come to a conclusion in court. Public opinion is fine, but we are not there.

[claudette]

3. Yes it is

[EX500rider]

4. I was pretty sure after Hamas homicidal run thru the Kibbutz the IDF...

...would be in no mood to take prisoners, can't really blame them, the US troops were taking few SS prisoners after the Malmedy massacre in WWII.

[AntivaxHunters]

13. Does Abu Ghraib ring any bells?

[EX500rider]

16. Don't recall any prisoners massacred there

[wnylib]

52. Neither do I, but some people are pretty loose in their use of terms.

[AntivaxHunters]

85. People forget..

[wnylib]

87. As irrelevant to the current situation as the rest of

your misleading posts and OPs are.

[AntivaxHunters]

108. Nah

War crimes are war crimes no matter who's doing it.
If you don't like what I post then mute me. /Shrug

[AntivaxHunters]

83. Manadel al-Jamadi

Hopefully this refreshes you [link:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Manadel_al-Jamadi|]

[EX500rider]

95. A prisoner does not a massacrer make though does it

[AntivaxHunters]

109. War crimes are war crimes

Right? Right.
It's not something which is means tested by the amount of people who are murdered.

[EX500rider]

110. What is your point exactly and what does it have to do with Hamas Vs Israel?

[malaise]

117. Yes but some folks are never punished

While they love to,punish others.
This planet is fucked up beyond belief.

[ForgedCrank]

41. Can you

imagine allowing a murderous Hamas terrorists "surrender" and attempt to take him into custody, you know, since they have a propensity for self-detonating at opportune moments? Na, I don't think so.
Besides, the Geneva rules don't apply to terrorists. Let them hunt.

[ZonkerHarris]

51. so you think matching a war crime with another is the right thing to do?

Glad we don't have to be the good guys anymore!
Now we can just be like the Nazis! Yay!!!!!!!
And if Israel can murder their prisoners, then Hamas can murder theirs and it's all equal!!!!

[wnylib]

54. .

[EX500rider]

56. Just pointed out that historically when one side commits atrocities the other side...

...will be less inclined to take prisoners. Not surprising.

[ZonkerHarris]

57. The height of rationalization

[wnylib]

61. How calm and rational were you when you were in the midst of combat?

[EX500rider]

62. Or the height of reality

[choie]

146. The Geneva Convention

was agreed to in 1949, after WW2

[BlueCheeseAgain]

5. Article is paywalled.

Any link to the video?

[AntivaxHunters]

10. Posted an archive link

I updated.
There's videos on Twitter but I didn't want to post that here as it's very violent

[lapucelle]

38. HRW said there is a video. Neither the video nor a link is posted on their website.

As a matter of fact, there is no mention on the HRW website of the "people are saying" event that has somehow morphed into a "Blatant War Crime".

[wnylib]

59. Surprise, surprise. That is a consistent pattern with a few posters.

Makes them not credible, on anything else, of course.

[lapucelle]

65. "Doctor's" [sic] are very busy people.

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=364710

[wnylib]

66. Yes, I've noticed. Hard to miss.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

23. Note the date cited for the missing mystery video.

Oct. 10. I must have missed Israel invading Gaza a week ago. Of course when you make shit up online and 30 International Doctor's (sic) can't be bothered to fact-check before sharing non-existent videos...
Oh, wait, this is from a print publication - and according to 30 International Doctor's (sic) print is dead.

[lapucelle]

28. The tweet comes from HRW. N/T

[Hekate]

33. Well spotted, AZSkiffyGeek. This particular drumbeat is getting very old.

[Igel]

88. The problem is that the "publish" date might not be the "videoed date".

And the post doesn't say it was in Gaza. If done on 10/8 or 10/9, it might have been Hamasites that were in Israel and had committed the massacres (or would have).

Not convinced it's a real real, but unless I'm overlooking something these objections are distractions.

[ripcord]

6. Israel isn't part of the ICC

But I do notice how little talk there is about the war crimes of Hamas.

[maxsolomon]

8. Because Israel is a nation and Hamas is a terrorist organization.

Virtually no one, particularly at DU, is confused as to whether Hamas' atrocities on 10/7 are crimes.

[redqueen]

9. Was going to say the same.

Hamas are terrorists, fucking duh

The desperate rhetoric around here is going from bad to worse

[AZSkiffyGeek]

19. So that makes their actions okay?

I know people don't want Israel to do anything about the slaughter of their women and children, but apparently terrorists are now exempt from international responsibility as well?

[claudette]

25. Of course not

But Under the Geneva convention nations are bound by international law that prohibits war crimes. One is horrified but not surprised when a terrorist group commits war crimes. But when a nation does, it puts them in the same boat as the groups that do commit war crimes.

[unweird]

14. Why, is Hamas part of the ICC?

Or is there another point to be made here?

[Igel]

89. Because it gave them standing to bring cases before the ICC.

Knowing that Israel is not and wouldn't be any time soon allows asymmetric legal warfare.

[AntivaxHunters]

15. Neither are we

That doesn't make water boarding torture ok or the war crimes committeed at Abu Ghraib fine & dandy.

[redqueen]

17. Or the use of cluster munitions imo. nt

[AntivaxHunters]

18. Yup agreed

[AZSkiffyGeek]

21. IDF is waterboarding prisoners at Abu Ghraib now?

Which Twitter source did you get that information from?

[Think. Again.]

112. Why are you....

...intentionally and falsely pretending that posters are saying things they obviously are not saying?

I thought this was a discussion board, not some kind of malicious party game.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

119. Why not ask the poster why they are making ridiculous false equivalencies

To defend their false Tweets?
Don’t bother answering, I know why…

[Think. Again.]

121. You think war crimes...

...lack a level of equivalency?

And why are you assuming the poster created the tweet also?

I think it's obvious that the poster is being ganged up on, but I don't understand why, none of the snarky responses really hold any water.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

122. When did I say he wrote the Tweet?

Oh yeah, I didn’t. But keep on defending your buddy’s inaccurate and inflammatory shares from Elon Musk’s alt-right playground.
And maybe learn that Abu Ghraib had nothing to do with Gaza.

[Think. Again.]

123. ummm....

You wrote...

"Why not ask the poster why they are making ridiculous false equivalencies
To defend their false Tweets?"

[AZSkiffyGeek]

125. Well thank you for the correction

Since you are so good at figuring out meanings maybe you can explain why the OP POSTED a Tweet containing claims of a war crime with zero evidence.

[Think. Again.]

127. Maybe the poster...

...felt strongly about what they see as a war crime?

[Omnipresent]

7. Things like that, make it harder for those..

Israeli hostages to be released without harm.

[Cha]

12. Fuck GD Murdering Baby Killer Fucking ASSholes HAMAS.

They Are the TERRORIST War Criminals

[Calculating]

20. Terrorists aren't playing by the rules of war

So they can't expect them in return

[AZSkiffyGeek]

22. Apparently because they aren't an army they don't have to

[redqueen]

40. Wrong. Again. Because they are terrorists, no one expects them to.

Hope that was a simple enough explanation

[AntivaxHunters]

24. Now do Iraq

With places like Abu Ghraib.
War crimes are war crimes.
There is no means testing.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

27. Not sure what your point is...

I don't recall hearing anything about Hamas being in Iraq. Did you get that bit of information from Twitter as well?

[lapucelle]

29. The point is "Quick! Look over here! N/T

[Hekate]

34. The point is "US is the same as Hamas. Bad America, always. Israel is worse than Hamas. Evil Israel"

And also “Squirrel!”

[SickOfTheOnePct]

36. Ok I have to admit

“Squirrel” made me spew my Coke.

[Jedi Guy]

26. If true, alternate title, "Video shows terrorist trash who fucked around and found out."

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if Hamas fighters' attempt to surrender was a ruse and they were wearing suicide vests for when the IDF got in close. If that's occurred to me I'm sure it's occurred to IDF commanders, and I'm also sure they weren't in the mood to show mercy to these assholes, anyway.

It is kind of amusing to see them surrender, though, after all the braying by Hamas about how they "love death as you love life." Enjoy it, fellas, and may more of your buddies join you soon.

[Claritie Pixie]

30. Is your OP intended to be sympathetic to Hamas?

I read the economist article and I’m failing to see how the info within it and the tweet/x post you decided to share are evidence of “blatant war crimes” (your words). Why did you choose those words and state them in such a conclusive manner without definitive evidence?

Curious.

[lapucelle]

31. Imagine inferring "Blatant War Crimes" from "The video appears to show..."

Some might call that "agenda driven".

There's a reason HRW chose a paywalled article.

They wanted folks to see the headline and the picture, but not read the story.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

39. The video isn't even mentioned in the article

The quoted lines are nowwhere to be found...

[lapucelle]

42. I know. That's why HRW linked to a paywalled story.

HRW deleted this tweet today. I wonder why?

[AZSkiffyGeek]

44. Wonder when this thread will be deleted...

Nah, I don't really.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

47. Agree

I found the article itself to be quite informative and it certainly didn’t paint the picture of Israel committing war crimes.

[edhopper]

107. Because ALL their posts about this conflict

are anti-Israel.

[Dorian Gray]

140. yep

it's a pattern.

[DavidDvorkin]

32. "Appears to show"

I'll withold judgement on the validity of the video.

[lapucelle]

43. It appears that the video that appears to show is apocryphal. N/T

[LiberaBlueDem]

35. It is cruel and unusual punishment

What Israel is doing is cruel.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

[Hekate]

37. What do you propose that Israel (or Ukraine) do do defend themselves? Please do tell.

[inthewind21]

46. Well

for starters not cut off all water, food and electricity to civilians then start bombing. Since you are perfectly ok with the "casualties of war" I can only assume if a terrorist cell were discovered in your neighborhood in a rental, an organization that had committed horrible acts in your neighboring state, you'd be ok with drones taking out your entire neighborhood right? I mean it's just casualties of war right?


Cue the "But that's different" in 5..4..3..2..

[SickOfTheOnePct]

49. To save others?

I would be.

Of course for a truly valid comparison, I would have been told that terrorists were in the neighborhood, and I should leave before the bombing starts.

And I would do so.

[Act_of_Reparation]

68. Oh, you would, would you?

Cool story.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

70. 😂😂

[SickOfTheOnePct]

58. You haven't answered the question

Saying what you wouldn’t do isn’t the same as saying what you would do.

[BlueCheeseAgain]

101. I notice the answer is always what not to do.

They never have an actual plan.

[Hekate]

72. For starters, do not tell me what you think I am "perfectly ok with." I asked you a question...

… and you deflected.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

45. So I went to archive link

Read the article, and I still don’t see the video. I’m obviously missing something.

The article is a good read though, and goes into much more detail on actual law around warfare than one would expect.

[AntivaxHunters]

63. Ya I'm not posting the video

And glad the Economist didn't.
It's floating around Twitter & is bad.
I figured it would be quite possibly traumatic for some here & it's definitely too violent & graphic.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

64. If you've

Actually seen it , you should be able to provide the X handle of the person or group that posted it.

As it is, I’m doubting it actually exists.

[Torchlight]

67. I'm rather certain you won't.

natch.

[lapucelle]

69. Copy the link, type a space in it to "break" it and then post the broken link here.

That would reassure everyone that the video actually exists.

[Hekate]

74. The "thirty doctor's" (sic) who post on this account seem to be unified in some regards

[Dorian Gray]

142. Right.

[AntivaxHunters]

80. Oh? I don't?

[link:https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218368591|]

[WheelWalker]

73. I have an open mind, but I am skeptical.

Is there a video, what does it show, who made it, and what is intended by its making and distribution.

First, IDF is not known for making or permitting videos of executions. Terrorists are.

Second, does the video, if it exists and is not a deep fake, show individuals in IDF uniforms killing unarmed captives? I recall reports of Hamas terrorists donning IDF uniforms acquired during their assault on IDF bases during the Oct.7 attack. Such a video might actually show terrorists, dressed in IDF uniforms, executing hostages.

Third, is the making and release of such a video a false flag tactic to inflame anti-Israeli sentiment? The making and release of execution videos is an established terrorist tactic, but wholly out of character and counter-productive to Israel's objectives.

If the actors, events and video are genuine, there will be investigations. I will keep an open mind pending the outcome.

[Hekate]

75. All your points are salient, especially #3

[Hermit-The-Prog]

82. Don't you wish that sometimes such a post could be moved to #1 position?

Sometimes debates heat up, get esoteric, or get personal before veracity and motive of the source or content are questioned.

[Hekate]

86. Yes I do

And I put out a call for better attention to sources, for all the good that will do

[WheelWalker]

111. Your speculation why the IDF would make and distribute a video of their apparent "war crime"?

I'm getting confused in this fog of war. I think you are saying the video shows not what the OP claims. If there is another video that shows what the OP claims, but we can't view it, then I stand on my skepticism as stated in my above post. I think you agree with me? This thread is really difficult for an aging mind to follow and apply reason.

[WheelWalker]

115. Thank you. I edited my reply to your post to recite my confusion.

I appreciate your clarification.

[WheelWalker]

136. Strength and honor.

[Think. Again.]

138. okay...

...so you disagree with the poster about what is 'a good thing', and what they consider criminal.

But may I ask why you won't post your video?

[Think. Again.]

141. No, well, I don't have an account...

...but ocassionally I will click on links to twitter that folks post here, but recently I can only see the one portion of the twitter thread that is linked, not the whole thread, and that tends to present things out of context.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

77. I'm interested

I’m the video mentioned by the OP…this doesn’t like the same one.

[AntivaxHunters]

81. Nobody here on DU is a "Hamas propagandist"

Nobody.

There are those of us who are "humanity propagandists" though. Israel has committed atrocities just like Hamas has through our the years. I prefer supporting those who don't have a voice, are exploited, & who should be alive today.

If that's wrong then I never want to be right. Ever.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

84. Where is the video?

You claim to have seen it, and there are numerous ways for you to provide that info without directly linking to it.

Why won’t you do that?

[AntivaxHunters]

90. Because the rules state no overly graphic violence

If people want to see it then they're free to search Twitter. I'd prefer not to get in trouble.

[AntivaxHunters]

96. There are 2 videos

If you want to link to link to it have at it.
If you do,.please label it NSFW so those who have PTSD aren't harmed by it. Thanks 👍🏼

[AntivaxHunters]

99. There are 2

One with a drone the other a body cam which is a bit closer.

[AntivaxHunters]

105. Why exactly is it unfortunate for me?

I'm not responding to you anymore.
My goal is not to argue with you.
If you feel comfortable posting the videos then have at it.
Obviously we disagree & it would seem that we're not changing each other's minds so let's not waste one another's time & agree to disagree ❤️

[AntivaxHunters]

98. I have seen both videos

I don't feel comfortable posting it as I've explained. That should be good enough for you. There's people on here who have PTSD & who've seen combat. Please consider that.
Thank you.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

100. There are any number of ways

For you tell everyone where the video is without actually linking to it or showing it.

That you refuse to do so speaks volumes to the veracity of the title of your OP.

[AntivaxHunters]

102. No it speaks to compassion & empathy of others

As I have explained.
I'm unwilling to post violent graphic images or link to them due to people having PTSD. Kindly respect that, thank you.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

103. No one is asking

You to post violent content, as has been stated previously.

[Dorian Gray]

143. What is the handle of the person on twitter

who posted the video then? Can you tell us that much? We can choose to go watch it if we want proof.

[Hekate]

79. A previous post of the OP's that turned out to be erroneous got a lot of attention before...

Last edited Mon Oct 16, 2023, 06:41 PM - Edit history (1)

… being shut down by the OP. Many people believed on their say-so that MSNBC had fired their Muslim reporters/anchors, and got very angry. Many people also debunked the claim thoroughly, but every new respondent to the thread saw only the OP and joined the anger at the presumptive injustice. 138 replies ain’t chicken feed.

Note to Jury: This is readily available DU public record. I participated in that thread, having seen Ali Velshi reporting from the war zone many times in the previous days, obviously still in the employ of MSNBC.

My point is that once again the OP is being requested to verify their sources, and to examine said sources carefully. Once again, every person responding is having their emotions whipsawed. One of the more rational has pointed out that “the making and release of execution videos is an established terrorist tactic, but out of character for the IDF.” I think that’s well worth considering.

Second note to Jury: I think the issue of legitimate sourcing is also well worth considering. It’s in our TOS, after all.

[Dorian Gray]

144. Thank you Hekate

This has been a pattern for a long time.

[Hekate]

145. You're welcome

[totodeinhere]

113. Both sides have been committing war crimes since the Jewish state was founded and even before that.

So what else is new? And for the matter the Allies committed war crimes during WWII such as the bombing of Dresden . And Bush committed war crimes when he authorized torture carried out by the CIA.. Shit happens I am afraid.

[Think. Again.]

120. I don't understand why...

...someone who is comfortable with posting the video doesn't post it?

[AZSkiffyGeek]

124. I don't understand why the OP made up a war crime but wants others to find his wvidence

But I’m sure you can connect that to Abu Ghraib.

[Think. Again.]

128. But I read upthread...

...that someone else claims to have seen the video but for some reason hasn't posted it either...

[AZSkiffyGeek]

131. Why should someone else do the OP's work?

They made the claim that Israel is executing prisoners. And then refused to provide evidence.
Of course they’ve also claimed that MSNBC fired all their Muslim reporters, and that Israel invaded the West Bank.
Which tells me they have no idea how to discern truth on Twitter or they are deliberately posting misinformation.

[Think. Again.]

133. Okay...

...that poster sounds like one you would want to put on 'ignore'.

[lapucelle]

137. Why?

[Hekate]

147. Lulz. Or keep an eye on.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

126. I don't understand why the person

Who is making the claim doesn’t tell anyone how to find it.

[Think. Again.]

129. But TomConroy says...

...that they have also seen the video and yet they haven't posted it either...?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

130. Who knows if its the same video?

The OP made a claim, and now doesn’t want to provide the actual evidence of the claim.

[Think. Again.]

132. For a valid reason in my opinion...

...besides, isn't it against DU rules to post stuff like that?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

134. No one is asking the OP to post video

They can say what site it’s on, provide a link with a space so that it doesn’t play in the window, among other things.

[Think. Again.]

135. Okay now you're just playing games.

Good night.