Gaza

[dreamer_easy]

Amnesty International Australia asks Australians to email the government asking them to urge the UN Security Council to demand attacks from both sides cease. Read AI statements and news on the situation.

MSF (Doctors Without Borders) is on the ground in Gaza and can use donations. The Red Cross is also in Gaza (and in the firing line) and is appealing for donations. And Israel's branch of the Red Cross, Magen David Adom, is caring for both Israeli and Palestinian citizens.

Comments

[mondyboy.livejournal.com]

First off, I would like the fighting to end.

But going by its headline, I thought that AI article was going to be neutral. But, sadly, it isn't. While it mentions that Palestinian gunmen are endangering Palestinian lives, it spends most of its wordage berating Israeli soldiers for using Palestinian households to take up sniper positions. It never mentions that Hamas use civilians as sheilds - though the article does point out that using civilians in anyway, is terrible.

The article also makes no mention at all of the Israeli civilians who have been endangered in rocket attacks from Fatah/ Hezbollah and Hamas since 2002

I don't condone the actions of Israeli soldiers who perform voilent actions on civilians without cause. And I hate that over 100 Palestinian children have died. That's shocking.

But please, AI, don't pretend to write a neutral article on the conflict when it's really a veiled attack on Israel's tactics.

[kateorman.livejournal.com]

You mean today's press release, I take it. In all honesty, I am very weary of hearing each side claim they are the victim of unfair reporting. Given Israel's disproportionate response in the current flareup and the enormously higher casualties on the Palestinian side, I frankly do not have a problem if a single report on a single issue condemns both sides' actions - including the misuse of civilian homes by Palestinian gunmen via intimidation - but emphasises the Israeli side somewhat more.

[mondyboy.livejournal.com]

Well, I could argue that the reason why Palestinian casualties have been so high is because Hamas use civilians - both people and instiutions - as shield. But I don't have a citation to back that up.

Then again neither does the AI article when it states this as a matter of fact: "Israeli forces have bombed civilian homes and other buildings, arguing that they had been used as cover by gunmen firing at Israeli targets, although Palestinian fighters usually vacate the areas as soon as they have fired."

[kateorman.livejournal.com]

Coincidentally, I've just heard back from the embassy, who make that very argument - that it's Hamas' fault for using human shields. However, as the AI report states, it is illegal both for Palestinian gunmen to use human shields and for the Israel army to fire on those human shields. If an enemy soldier misuses a school, hospital, or home to launch an attack, the other side may not endanger civilians by attacking that target under any circumstances, even though the other side broke the rules first. By analogy, a police officer, fired at by a criminal, may not blow up the school into which the criminal has just fled. We wouldn't accept the officer's excuse that it was self-defence, or that it was the criminal's fault. (Nor would we expect the officer to just give up, of course: he must still stop the criminal, but without endangering innocent lives.)