Lesson Learned

[Skeptic]

Before Israel started the operation in Gaza, Hamas lobbed rockets daily into Israel for years.

None of the "human rights" folks cared.

Now Israelies are in Gaza again, killing and being killed.

So now, the "human rights" folks are outraged at Israel -- but for the first time, they even bother to condemn Hamas' rockets as well, and demand, in fairness, Hamas will stop firing them at the same time that Israel stop the fighting. Also, for the first time, they care to openly agree that Hamas is, indeed, a genocidal organization -- they only say that this wasn't enough of a reason to attack Gaza.

In other words, it took this war to get the "human rights" folks to notice and care about Hamas' actions against Israel, and demand it stops.

This is, of course, not the first time this happened.

Before the 9/11 attacks, the same "human rights" folks didn't give a rat's behind what on earth the USA was doing across the globe, even if it did wrong. Only after the USA was attacked on 9/11, did they start looking all over the place for things to blame the USA for.

Simiarly, before the Intifada, the same "human rights" folks might have disliked Israel -- but the white-hot condemnations and exposing of Israel's wrongs (again, whether accurate or not) -- only started in earnest after Arafat's terror war against Israel started.

MORAL OF THE STORY:

You feel wrong? Opressed? Wish the human-rights folks saw your side of the story, or for that matter even cared at all about you?

Then start a war and start killing people, the more the better. After a short period of initial outrage, you will gain more and more sympathy, your cause (or should I say, "root cause"?) will get attention, and -- usually for the first time -- your side of the story will finally, FINALLY matter for the "human rights" folks.

 

[gdnp]

This is an interesting planet that you live on.

It is anywhere near earth?

You make numerous claims about what "human rights" folk have done without a speck of documentation. Essentially a bunch of claims that may or may not have some basis in fact, mixed with biased assumptions and unsupported generalizations.

Sorry, make some specific allegations based on actual data. Otherwise there is nothing to discuss here.

Oh, and to add insult to injury, you tag it with an uninformative title.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Just because you don't remember them doing it in the past doesn't mean they didn't.

 

[FireGarden]

Before Israel started the operation in Gaza, Hamas lobbed rockets daily into Israel for years.

None of the "human rights" folks cared.

A moment on google turns up links like this from 2005:
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2005/06/08/hamas-must-end-attacks-against-civilians

[quote="human rights" folk, in this case HRW] Hamas must cease immediately “Qassam” rocket and mortar attacks against civilian areas, Human Rights Watch said today. [/quote]

Google again:

UN humanitarian chief condemns Palestinian rocket attacks
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/02/17/africa/ME-GEN-Israel-UN-Rockets.php

Of course you'll write these off as "ritual" condemnations in order to appear even-handed.

Dec2008:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7822048.stm

“We tell the Palestinians that rockets are illegal and bad. Then we have five months without rockets and things don’t improve. It plays into the hands of extremists.”

Before the 9/11 attacks, the same "human rights" folks didn't give a rat's behind what on earth the USA was doing across the globe, even if it did wrong. Only after the USA was attacked on 9/11, did they start looking all over the place for things to blame the USA for.

Are you joking?
I vaguely remember some protests back in the days of yore regarding Vietnam and such. And, though the topic often changed, I remember that criticism continued up to the present day. But maybe that's my imagination.

Have people become more aware of what America does around the world since 9/11? I think that is probably true. But to say that no-one blamed America for anything before that is simply wrong.

 

[ddt]

Before Israel started the operation in Gaza, Hamas lobbed rockets daily into Israel for years.

None of the "human rights" folks cared.

FireGarden already gave some counterexamples. Or do you want more? Should I dig up the quotes from the various reports from Amnesty, HRW, the monthly reports of the UN rapporteur to the UNSC, etc. etc.?

Before the 9/11 attacks, the same "human rights" folks didn't give a rat's behind what on earth the USA was doing across the globe, even if it did wrong. Only after the USA was attacked on 9/11, did they start looking all over the place for things to blame the USA for.

9/11 - which 9/11?

Ah, you mean 9/11/1973, the day that Pinochet, aided by the CIA and the US government, overthrew the democratically elected government of Salvador Allende, and subsequently had thousands of political opponents killed and tens or maybe hundreds of thousands tortured.

Nobody criticized the US before 9/11.

Oh, and my folks had posters with "Johnson murderer" on the windows.

Simiarly, before the Intifada, the same "human rights" folks might have disliked Israel -- but the white-hot condemnations and exposing of Israel's wrongs (again, whether accurate or not) -- only started in earnest after Arafat's terror war against Israel started.

Again some historical revisionism - even double so.

(1) People did notice those human rights violations.

(2) Calling the Intifada "Arafat's terror war"? Arafat had nothing to do with the Intifada. It caught him by surprise as much as the next guy.

MORAL OF THE STORY:

Ex falso sequitur quodlibet.

Skeptic, this is the second time in a week you start a thread on a blatantly false premise. That doesn't serve your cause - au contraire, it makes by association look your cause only worse.

 

[NorfolkAtheist]

Is there an "Totally Out To Lunch Award" or something that this post can be nominated for?

 

[FireGarden]

9/11 - which 9/11?

Ah, you mean 9/11/1973, the day that Pinochet, aided by the CIA and the US government, overthrew the democratically elected government of Salvador Allende, and subsequently had thousands of political opponents killed and tens or maybe hundreds of thousands tortured.

Damn!
I didn't think of that!

 

[gtc]

I think Skeptic is wrong.

The protest I observed in Sydney on Thursday condemned Israel's actions outright. The 'Women in Black' even lied about what was happening by pretending that photos from Lebanon in 2006 were evidence of the 'Holocaust in Gaza' in 2008.

No one there suggested that Hamas were doing anything wrong. Indeed, children in Hamas scarves were handing out flyers for another 'peace' rally next weekend and various socialist groups were handing out flyers claiming that Hamas were the legitimate leader of the Palestinian resistance movement and should be supported.

 

[Monketi Ghost]

You could choke a skeptical horse with all the generalisations in the OP

 

[Skeptic]

I think Skeptic is wrong.

The protest I observed in Sydney on Thursday condemned Israel's actions outright. The 'Women in Black' even lied about what was happening by pretending that photos from Lebanon in 2006 were evidence of the 'Holocaust in Gaza' in 2008.

No one there suggested that Hamas were doing anything wrong. Indeed, children in Hamas scarves were handing out flyers for another 'peace' rally next weekend and various socialist groups were handing out flyers claiming that Hamas were the legitimate leader of the Palestinian resistance movement and should be supported.

Well, true, but I wasn't talking about those guys. I was talking about those who kept shrugging "who cares?" when Hamas bombed Israel, and only now, once Israel started a war, they bother to even condemn Hamas.

As George Habash once said, justifying plane hijacking, "The world ignored us. Now at least it's talking about us." The "I condemn Hamas and Israel equally" folks -- which means, "until Israel started the war I couldn't be bothered to condemn Hamas" -- are the same folks who didn't give a flying, er, duck about the Palestinians until they started hijacking planes.

The talk about being "against violence", but in reality, they worship it and tend to support whomever is the most violent at the moment. Killing people is the way to their heart.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Well, true, but I wasn't talking about those guys. I was talking about those who kept shrugging "who cares?" when Hamas bombed Israel, and only now, once Israel started a war, they bother to even condemn Hamas.

As George Habash once said, justifying plane hijacking, "The world ignored us. Now at least it's talking about us." The "I condemn Hamas and Israel equally" folks -- which means, "until Israel started the war I couldn't be bothered to condemn Hamas" -- are the same folks who didn't give a flying, er, duck about the Palestinians until they started hijacking planes.

The talk about being "against violence", but in reality, they worship it and tend to support whomever is the most violent at the moment. Killing people is the way to their heart.

Interesting how you ignored every post but the one that was agreeable to your original position...

 

[Smackety]

it sucks. no one has proposed a solution that might be workable. Land is more sacred than blood it seems. this will never end.

 

[FireGarden]

it sucks. no one has proposed a solution that might be workable. Land is more sacred than blood it seems. this will never end.

There have been suggestions. Such as one from Brigadier General (Res.) Shmuel Zakai, former commander of the IDF's Gaza Division:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1048931.html

But that involved dealing with Hamas.

“We could have eased the siege over the Gaza Strip, in such a way that the Palestinians, Hamas, would understand that holding their fire served their interests. But when you create a tahadiyeh, and the economic pressure on the Strip continues, it’s obvious that Hamas will try to reach an improved tahadiyeh, and that their way to achieve this, is resumed Qassam fire.

“The carrot is improvement of the economic situation in the Gaza Strip. You cannot just land blows, leave the Palestinians in Gaza in the economic distress they’re in, and to expect that Hamas will just sit around and do nothing. That’s something that’s simply unrealistic.”

[...] “It’s just like after the disengagement. We left Gaza and we thought that with that troubles were over. Did we really think that a million and a half people living in that kind of poverty were going to mount the rooftops and begin singing the Beitar hymn? That is illogical.”

I started a thread on his suggestion here:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=131859

 

[soikins]

Well, true, but I wasn't talking about those guys. I was talking about those who kept shrugging "who cares?" when Hamas bombed Israel, and only now, once Israel started a war, they bother to even condemn Hamas.

Name three. Provide quotations and references.

 

[Skeptic]

(Shrug)

Let's try "parky76", for instance. A member since 2006, searching for "parky76 AND Hamas" brings up only TWO threads that even mention Hamas before the current flare-up -- neither of them, so far as I could tell, demanding Hamas stop the rocket firing; but even if they both did, that's nothing compared to the DOZEN or so threads that he posted during the current war, which finally, finally, whatever they say about Israel, also demand Hamas stop its shelling of Israeli towns.

Or take "Tsukasa Buddha". Member since 2006. 3000+ posts. Before the current war, a search shows he posted nothing that mentions Hamas. As long as it was merely Jews being targeted by random rocket fire, he(?) couldn't have cared less. Not important enough to post about, I guess, let alone demand Hamas cease its bombings.

Or take "a_unique_person". True, he has many posts about Hamas before the war. But they're inevitably to the effect that Hamas isn't that bad, and thoroughly ignore its random shelling of Israeli civilians (except perhaps to occassionally dress up a "but Israel is even worse" rant against charges of bias on his part). The possiblity of a cease-fire -- that is, one where Hamas, too, stops lobbing rockets -- had only entered his skull after the current war erupted, too. Of course he strongly condemns Israel -- he is constitutionally unable to do anything else -- but at least now he does not TOTALLY ignore Hamas' random shelling of civlians.

Of course, this is just a quick search using the JREF's "advanced search" feature. I am not saying it is accurate in every detail. But the general picture is clear. I could go on -- It's not only them. Virtually all the "pro-cease-fire" crowd here now demanding Hamas cease firing as well as Israel cared nothing, or as good as nothing, about Hamas' random bombing of civlians before Israel started the current operation.

As I said: the more violent you are, the more they'll like you and see your point of view.

 

[quarky]

Is it too late to move Israel?
What about a new homeland for the Palestinians?

How sacred is the notion of homeland?
Most of us have wandered and lost track of such concepts, yet we all deserve a home.

Can the world afford this tension?
Is there a logical solution, short of time and inter-breeding?

 

[FireGarden]

(Shrug)

Let's try "parky76", for instance. A member since 2006, searching for "parky76 AND Hamas" brings up only TWO threads that even mention Hamas before the current flare-up -- neither of them, so far as I could tell, demanding Hamas stop the rocket firing;

Huh? are you going by thread titles or content of posts?

Heeere's Parky!
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4295548&postcount=24

The fact is that Hamas and Islamic Jihad have fired 100 rockets into Israel today. These attacks were unprovoked. I am no fan of Israel's Apartheid-racist policies, but they still have every right to defend themselves and stop these attacks against innocent civilians.

Or are you moving the goal posts by saying "before the current flare up"? Your OP started with "Before Israel started the operation in Gaza,... "

but even if they both did, that's nothing compared to the DOZEN or so threads that he posted during the current war, which finally, finally, whatever they say about Israel, also demand Hamas stop its shelling of Israeli towns.

But "even if you're wrong", what Parky said before is nothing compared to Parky's response to the killing of hundreds of people. Well good on Parky! The killing of hundreds, injury of 1000's and the terrorising of 1.5 million does require a bigger outcry than that due to the qassams.

That's just my opinion, mind.

But if you're desperate to have a horror contest: that unleashed by the IDF is worse by many degrees.

That's still just my opinion, mind.

Or take "Tsukasa Buddha". Member since 2006. 3000+ posts. Before the current war, a search shows he posted nothing that mentions Hamas.

A thread titled "19 Palestinians Killed - Hamas Vows Retaliation", dated 2006. http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68185

TB's only comment: "Isn't insanity repeating the same thing over and over again and expecting different results?"

I read that as criticism.

As long as it was merely Jews being targeted by random rocket fire, he(?) couldn't have cared less. Not important enough to post about, I guess, let alone demand Hamas cease its bombings.

Demand to who? To Hamas? What's their phone number?

Or take "a_unique_person". True, he has many posts about Hamas before the war. But they're inevitably to the effect that Hamas isn't that bad, and thoroughly ignore its random shelling of Israeli civilians (except perhaps to occassionally dress up a "but Israel is even worse" rant against charges of bias on his part).

So you yourself admit that he doesn't ignore it (thoroughly or otherwise). You just dismiss what he says because it doesn't fit your argument.

As I said: the more violent you are, the more they'll like you and see your point of view.

Olmert is being very violent. But a lot of people are not liking him for it.

Do you really see violence as a means to win hearts and minds? Or are you simply unable to understand what I quoted Shmuel Zakai saying in my previous post?

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Or take "Tsukasa Buddha". Member since 2006. 3000+ posts. Before the current war, a search shows he posted nothing that mentions Hamas. As long as it was merely Jews being targeted by random rocket fire, he(?) couldn't have cared less. Not important enough to post about, I guess, let alone demand Hamas cease its bombings

He he, so you just label people who don't agree with your posts "human rights" people who don't care about the killing of jews, etc.

Here's a thread in April about Hamas' kid program:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-110328.html

LOL, I love the high production values. And the White House would make a pretty crappy mosque.

But it is so sad that they are trying to teach children to kill.

Then on a thread about Israel giving up the Golan in return for Syria stopping its support for Hamas:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=114529

Hm, my initial reaction would be "yes". But the Golan Heights are of strategic importance in launching an attack on Israel...

I don't know how bitter Syria is about the matter, but it could help lead to peace.

If they did more than just sign a peace treaty, and took some concrete steps, then I would say "yes".

And then in that same thread:

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Thay should have never seized that area in their racist war of aggression and invasion.

WTF?

And then in a thread about teh Zionist regime:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=112864&page=2

If I may try to logic with the troll a bit, I am not quite sure what "zionist" means anymore. I mean, in the early 1900's it certainly had a definition, but now it is just a "dirty word" that people use against Israel.

My position on the whole conflict is that it was gone about all wrong. Jewish settlers got along well in the region before others came and decided to make an official state, and then kick out Palestinians.

Of course, the Palestinians suck a lot more now with their whole effort on terrorism as a way to solve the problem. And all those other countries that fought Israel haven't exactly made things easy for the Palestinian refugees.

But then Israel kinda sucked for saying that they wouldn't let Palestinians back into their homes because "Israel is a Jewish nation."

I could go on a lot more, but basically, my position is both sides suck, Israel just sucks less.

And again, I really don't see where the "zionist regime" fits in, especially with the recent offers that Israel made.

As you can see, I love blaming Israel. Now, where were your citations showing that since this recent battle started I've been ranting at the evil Israel?

By the way, I don't believe in human rights, let alone make demands about them around the world. Oh, and I support Israel.

Maybe you shouldn't assume things about people...

 

[GreNME]

(Shrug)

Let's try "parky76", for instance. A member since 2006, searching for "parky76 AND Hamas" brings up only TWO threads that even mention Hamas before the current flare-up -- neither of them, so far as I could tell, demanding Hamas stop the rocket firing; but even if they both did, that's nothing compared to the DOZEN or so threads that he posted during the current war, which finally, finally, whatever they say about Israel, also demand Hamas stop its shelling of Israeli towns.

Or take "Tsukasa Buddha". Member since 2006. 3000+ posts. Before the current war, a search shows he posted nothing that mentions Hamas. As long as it was merely Jews being targeted by random rocket fire, he(?) couldn't have cared less. Not important enough to post about, I guess, let alone demand Hamas cease its bombings.

Or take "a_unique_person". True, he has many posts about Hamas before the war. But they're inevitably to the effect that Hamas isn't that bad, and thoroughly ignore its random shelling of Israeli civilians (except perhaps to occassionally dress up a "but Israel is even worse" rant against charges of bias on his part). The possiblity of a cease-fire -- that is, one where Hamas, too, stops lobbing rockets -- had only entered his skull after the current war erupted, too. Of course he strongly condemns Israel -- he is constitutionally unable to do anything else -- but at least now he does not TOTALLY ignore Hamas' random shelling of civlians.

Of course, this is just a quick search using the JREF's "advanced search" feature. I am not saying it is accurate in every detail. But the general picture is clear. I could go on -- It's not only them. Virtually all the "pro-cease-fire" crowd here now demanding Hamas cease firing as well as Israel cared nothing, or as good as nothing, about Hamas' random bombing of civlians before Israel started the current operation.

As I said: the more violent you are, the more they'll like you and see your point of view.

For a skeptic, you're really struggling with confirmation bias there (and failing).

 

[ddt]

For a skeptic, you're really struggling with confirmation bias there (and failing).

I'm still at a loss what this thread is about at all. The OP was an utter fail, and Skeptic's post #15 wasn't better.

So, what lesson is supposed to be learned, Skeptic?