| Vittorio Arigoni, pro-Pal activist, found dead. Update: Moonbats blame Israel. Posted: 14 Apr 2011 06:16 PM PDT From JPost: Security officials found the body of an Italian man who had been abducted in the Gaza Strip in an abandoned house overnight Thursday, a Hamas security official said.
Two men were arrested and others were being sought.
Arrigoni, an Italian pacifist and blogger, has lived in the Gaza Strip for some time. He was shown blindfolded with blood around his right eye and a hand can be seen pulling his head up by his hair to face the camera.
A spokesman for the Hamas interior ministry in Gaza City said it was investigating the abduction.
The Arabic text that accompanied the footage of Arrigoni also said "the Italian hostage entered our land only to spread corruption" and it described Italy as "the infidel state". When you can't trust depraved, homicidal jihadists to keep someone alive for thirty hours, who can you trust? Countdown to the moonbats blaming Israel for his death: 3...2...1... UPDATE: I found one from before he was known dead. An Italian website claims that since Hamas has denied that there are any Salafis or Al Qaeda in Gaza, and since no Palestinian Arab would ever want to hurt someone who has done so much for them, it must be Israel that kidnapped him! And Ken O'Keefe has a rambling video also blaming the Jooooz. UPDATE 2: Sasha points out Max Ajl, who says flatly (and ungrammaticality): " He died because was in Gaza resisting the occupation." Wow! 
|
| Guess who moonbats blame for Vittorio's kidnapping? Posted: 14 Apr 2011 03:25 PM PDT From the nutty-left Salem News:  Possibly the strongest voice in the years-long struggle to free Palestine, 36-year old Vittorio Arrigoni, a journalist and activist with the International Solidarity Movement, was kidnapped in Gaza.
One person who knows the steadfast dedication of Vittorio 'Vic' Arrigoni is our writer Ken O'Keefe, also in Gaza, who stated the bottom line on this sad day.
"Who benefits? This is the question we must ask first when something like Vic Arrigoni being kidnapped happens. The answer is, Israel; nobody benefits more than Israel."
"So whether they are false-Muslims or agents of Israel, those that have Vic are serving Israel."
Well, that was predictable. Nice to know that Arrigoni travels in wonderful circles! 
|
| September scenarios for the UN (INSS) Posted: 14 Apr 2011 01:31 PM PDT Israel's Institute for National Security Studies has put out a paper that seems to be a very good summation of how things might play out in the scenarios being tossed around for a unilateral declaration of a Palestinian Arab state in September, including the much discussed "Uniting for Peace" scenarios. INSS Insight No. 251, April 11, 2011
UN General Assembly "Uniting for Palestine"
Robbie Sabel
Decision making in the UN General Assembly is on the basis of one vote for each member state. This may reflect the principle of sovereign equality of states, but clearly a situation where Micronesia and China have equal weight does not reflect political reality. The drafters of the UN Charter were therefore careful not to grant the General Assembly any executive or legislative power. Except on matters of procedure and budget, all General Assembly resolutions are only recommendations. The other main organ of the UN is the Security Council, which was granted the primary responsibility for matters of international security and peace. In contrast to the General Assembly, Council decisions are binding if adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.
During the early years of the Cold War, the Soviet Union used its veto power in the Security Council to prevent decisions being taken against North Korea. At the time the UN General Assembly was dominated by the Western states, and in order to try and bypass the stalemated Security Council the United States initiated General Assembly Resolution 377, commonly referred to as the "Uniting for Peace Resolution." The resolution declared that where the Security Council could not reach a decision because of a veto, a special session of the General Assembly could be convened "with a view to making appropriate recommendations for collective measures…including the use of armed force when necessary." Such resolutions require adoption by a two thirds majority at a specially convened emergency session of the Assembly. Because of the present automatic anti-Israel majority in the Assembly, "Uniting for Peace" resolutions have been used frequently for condemning Israeli policies. Resolutions adopted at such sessions, however, are still only recommendations and are not binding on states.
There are reports that this September, the Palestinian delegation to the UN, which has observer status at the organization, will attempt to introduce a new "Uniting for Peace" resolution. There are a number of possible scenarios for such a resolution. The most likely possibility would by a call for recognition of a Palestinian state within the 1967 boundaries. In fact, a 2003 Arab sponsored General Assembly "Uniting for Peace" resolution has already called for "Affirming the necessity of ending the conflict on the basis of the two-State solution of Israel and Palestine living side by side in peace and security based on the Armistice Line of 1949." If adopted, a new such resolution would grant the Palestinians further international support for their demand for a return to the 1967 lines. It would not however be binding on Israel or on any other state, not even for those states voting for the resolution. Under international law, except for cases where a former border is inherited by new states, borders can only be delimited by agreement between the states concerned. No UN organ has the authority to delimit boundaries.
A General Assembly resolution recognizing a Palestinian state would not mean acceptance of Palestine as a member of the UN. In order to be accepted as a member of the UN, the Palestinians would have to officially declare that they are a state, an act they have refrained so far from doing. Should the Palestinians unilaterally declare themselves to be a state, it would be a violation of the Oslo agreements and of the Middle East Roadmap, but it might have the salutary effect of changing the current image of the Israel-Palestinian dispute from that of a homeless people under military occupation into a fairly minor border dispute between two neighboring states.
Even if the Palestinians were to declare themselves as a state, the General Assembly could then only accept Palestine as a member of the UN if there is a recommendation to that effect from the Security Council. In a 1950 Advisory Opinion, the International Court of Justice explicitly stated that "The General Assembly can only decide to admit [a new member state] upon the recommendation of the Security Council" and the admission of a state to membership in the United Nations cannot be done "by a decision of the General Assembly when the Security Council has made no recommendation for admission." The Security Council could make such a recommendation if it determines that Palestine fulfils the international law criteria for recognition. These requirements are that the presumptive state has an effective government, a permanent population, defined territory and an ability to conduct foreign relations. There is no need, however, for a state to have clearly defined boundaries provided there is at least some territory that is under its effective control. A Security Council recommendation cannot be adopted, however, if a permanent member of the Council vetoes it by voting against the resolution.
One other, less likely scenario, is that the General Assembly will call for a UN trusteeship to replace Israel in the West Bank and Gaza. The League of Nations mandate for Palestine could serve as a precedent, and the UN has undertaken such trusteeship functions in Namibia, East Timor, and Kosovo. For the Palestinians to propose such a trusteeship implies, however, that they do not see themselves as being ripe yet for statehood. It is unlikely that they will make such a statement. Furthermore many UN member states might be very reluctant for the UN to undertake such an expensive and thankless task. They have only to recall Britain's unhappy record as the Mandatory power.
A third possible scenario is that the Assembly will request the International Court of Justice to give an advisory opinion confirming that the 1949 armistice lines are the boundaries of the Palestinian state. Requesting an opinion on the 1949 armistice lines might, however, be self defeating for the Palestinians as it would be extremely difficult for the World Court to find that a temporary Armistice Demarcation Line between Israel and Jordan is a binding international boundary. The Court in its 2004 advisory opinion on the "wall" in "Occupied Palestinian Territory," an opinion that was requested under a UN Arab sponsored "Uniting for Peace" resolution, refrained from making such a ruling regarding the 1949 Armistice Line.
The underlying issue remains that the UN General Assembly can only adopt non-binding recommendations. The Assembly cannot determine boundaries nor can it confer statehood. A boundary between Israel and a future Palestinian state can only be determined by agreement between the two parties. The international community can encourage or hinder agreement, but it cannot replace the parties in this respect.
|
| Afternoon links Posted: 14 Apr 2011 12:16 PM PDT |
| Italian "peace activist" kidnapped in Gaza (updated x3) Posted: 14 Apr 2011 11:11 AM PDT From JPost: An Italian human rights activist was kidnapped in the Gaza Strip by the al-Qaida-linked radical terrorist group Tawhid wal-Jihad, the group announced on Thursday.
The radical Islamist terror organization Tawhid wal-Jihad announced on Thursday that it has kidnapped an Italian human rights activist in the Gaza Strip, Israel Radio reported.
According to sources in the Strip, Victorio Larginoni arrived on one of the first flotillas to Gaza several years ago and has been living there since, according to the report.
In a video released by the group, the captive can be seen blindfolded with his hands tied. Tawhid made an ultimatum to Hamas that if it doesn't release one of its senior members by 5 p.m. Friday, that it will execute the Italian national, Israel Radio reported. The ISM admitted that he is one of theirs. His name is spelled Vittorio Arrigoni, and his anti-Israel articles are all over the Internet, mostly in Italian. UPDATE: Here's the video (h/t Israellycool) UPDATE 2: Here's a blog post where our prisoner complains that the French Foreign Minister expressed solidarity with Gilad Shalit. You know, the other person being held prisoner in Gaza, one that Vittorio did not have much sympathy for. He signs off that post with "Stay human and angry!"
It sounds like his kidnappers are taking the second half of that statement quite seriously. His Facebook page has lots of vile anti-Israel photos. UPDATE 3: He was found dead. 
|
| An Arab land, occupied Posted: 14 Apr 2011 09:49 AM PDT There is a land that has been populated by Arabs since the Muslim conquest. In the 20th century, it was occupied and annexed by non-Arabs. Now its Arab inhabitants are discriminated against. They have few political rights and their services and infrastructure are substandard. They suffer poverty and their children are malnourished. Water from the area is being diverted to the occupiers, causing severe shortages. Not only that, but land has been confiscated from the Arab inhabitants, and some have been forced to move out of their homeland. The occupiers are building industries in this land that are meant to take away its own natural resources. Moreover, the occupying power has moved its own citizens into this traditionally Arab land as well. Protesters against this discrimination and injustice have been beaten and killed. Hundreds have been arrested. Collective punishment has been meted against entire communities for the actions of some demonstrators. Where are these violations of humanitarian law taking place? In Al Ahwaz, in Iran: The historic claim of the Ahwazi Arabs to their Arab homeland is solid. Al Ahwaz was once a thriving province of Mesopotamia known for its Muslim scholars, poets and artists. From the mid-7th century until the mid 13th century, its people were ruled variously by Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs, their numbers swelled by Arab tribes from the Arabian Peninsula. A Mongol-invasion devastated most of Al Ahwaz that was later occupied by the founder of the Timurid Empire Tamerlane and his successors until the early 16th century when it fell to the Persian Safavid Dynasty.
Al Ahwaz came to be known as the semi-autonomous region of 'Arabistan' towards the end of the 16th century when it received an influx of Arab tribes from southern Iraq as well as a clan of the powerful Bani Ka'ab with origins in Central Arabia.
... On the cusp of 20th century, oil was discovered around Mohammerah when the British founded the Anglo-Persian Oil Company and entered into an oil exploration treaty with Shaikh Jabir's son Khaz'al. The UK guaranteed Arabistan's security and agreed payments to both Shaikh Khaz'al and the Shah of Iran.
What should have been a blessing for the Ahwaz Arabs was a curse. When Shaikh Khaz'al realised that Reza Shah's ambitions extended to Arabistan's oil wealth, he asked the British to defend the Ahwazi people and back their homeland's independence as an Arab state. Forced to choose, Britain reneged on its treaty with Khaz'al and supported the Shah.
Betrayed by the UK, in 1924, Khaz'al put his case before the League of Nations, but it was rejected.
With Britain's help, Reza Shah gained absolute control over the territory when he changed its name to Khuzistan.
...Tehran has discriminated against the Arabs of Al Ahwaz since their homeland's occupation and annexation by the Shah; they are being treated as third-class citizens, abandoned to primitive living standards and without even the basic political rights.
The Director of the Ahwaz Education and Human Rights Foundation, Karim Abdian, highlighted the Ahwazi plight in the UN. He explained that the Ahwazi population suffers from a shortage of drinking water, electricity, plumbing, telephone and sewage. Fifty per cent live in absolute poverty, while some 80 per cent of children are malnourished.
The dispossessed Ahwazi Arabs are under-represented in parliament and accuse the Iranian government of racially-based political and economic prejudice, which is why some groups are calling for Al Ahwaz to be liberated and recognised as an independent Arab state. However, the government is attempting to manipulate demographics by setting-up self-contained farming settlements and bringing in Persians to work there.
It is believed that the government is also trying to eradicate the Ahwazi culture. Iranian authorities will not register birth certificates to Arab new-borns unless they assume Persian names. Schools in Al Ahwaz are barred from teaching Arabic, which is also banned from parliament and ministries. Arabic media is forbidden in the territory. Journalists who write against this cultural barbarism are routinely imprisoned.
In 2007, six Ahwazi Arabs were subjected to kangaroo courts and put on death row on charges of converting to Sunni Islam, giving their children Sunni names, flying the all-white Ahwazi Arab flag, and as "enemies of God". Those and similar rigged trials have been condemned by the European Union, the UN and numerous human rights organisations. Amnesty International says: Land expropriation by the Iranian authorities is reportedly so widespread that it appears to amount to a policy aimed at dispossessing Arabs of their traditional lands. This is apparently part of a strategy aimed at the forcible relocation of Arabs to other areas while facilitating the transfer of non-Arabs into Khuzestan and is linked to economic policies such as zero interest loans which are not available to local Arabs.
In October 2005, a letter came to light, dated 9 July 2005, in which the Arvand Free Trade Zone Organization outlined plans for the confiscation of 155 km², including Arab land and villages, to provide for the establishment of the Arvand Free Trade Zone between Abadan and the Iraqi border.(9) All those living within this area will have their land confiscated. Under Iranian law, no challenge can be made to the confiscation, only to the amount of compensation offered, which in other schemes is reported to have been as little as one fortieth of the market value.
The UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Adequate Housing said in an interview(10)following his visit to Iran in July 2005:
…when you visit Ahwaz…there are thousands of people living with open sewers, no sanitation, no regular access to water, electricity and no gas connections… why is that? Why have certain groups not benefited? ... Again in Khuzestan, …we drove outside the city about 20 km and we visited the areas where large development projects are coming up - sugar cane plantations and other projects along the river - and the estimate we received is that between 200,000 - 250,000 Arab people are being displaced from their villages because of these projects. And the question that comes up in my mind is, why is it that these projects are placed directly on the lands that have been homes for these people for generations? I asked the officials, I asked the people we were with. And there is other land in Khuzestan where projects could have been placed which would have minimised the displacement.
He also referred to attempts by the government to transfer non-Arabs into the area, as in the case of Shirinshah, a new town mainly populated by non-Arab inhabitants from Yazd province, and highlighted the discrepancy between the wealth generated from the oil resources of Khuzestan and the very deprived Arab neighbourhoods he saw. According to Al Arabiya, Iran has stepped up its war against Khuzestan separatists in recent days, and hundreds are missing. Where are the human rights protesters, the boycotters, the op-eds, the enraged college activists so concerned over the human rights of millions of Arabs? Where are the dozens of organizations dedicated to fighting injustice? Where are the UN agencies dedicated to the cause of Al Ahwaz? Where are the calls by the White House and the EU for an independent Arabistan/Al Ahwaz? Why can I not find a single mention of Khuzestan, or Arabistan, or Al Ahwaz in any of the thousands of Wikileaks State Department documents so far released? Most importantly, where are the Arab nations who are turning their backs on their own people being persecuted? Why isn't this issue being brought up at every meeting with Western leaders? Why indeed? 
|
| Peres Center supports US imposing solution on Israel Posted: 14 Apr 2011 08:48 AM PDT From Israel Behind The News, by David Bedein: At the J Street conference, Dr. Ron Pundak, director of the Peres Centre for Peace addressed the J-Street Conference, and viewed as the representative of Israeli President Shimon Peres, referred to PA President Mahmoud Abbas and PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad as a "dream ticket," saying that Israel "will not find better leaders working for peace."
Pundak indicated that he believed that Israel should arrive at an agreement with this "dream ticket," - without delay - but that "unfortunately we do not have on our side a similar dream team". President Peres indeed dispatched a letter of greeting, to J Street, dated February 26, 2011.
...
Pundak added that "The Peres Center very much supports the activities of J-Street", confirming that the Peres Center is one of the "participating organizations" at the conference.
Pundak went on to say that the Peres Center would join the J Street effort to favor an Obama initiative to impose a solution.
Pundak criticized "the person in the White house" for "doing nothing" to make a two state solution to become reality. He also said that Obama should take action in the very near future. When asked why he was calling on Obama to impose a solution on the parties, rather than getting out on the streets and working to convince Israelis of his position and cause his government to fall, Pundak replied: "But, how do we do it?"
Pundak added that, 'This is also an international interest not only our interest. We don't have a government which is willing to move forward so we need to impose something." So the organization that represents the President of Israel officially believes that Israelis do not know what is best for them, and that outside parties must force the country to do what a minority believes is best. (h/t Mike) 
|
| Isabel Kershner continues to claim that Hamas fighters were civilian Posted: 14 Apr 2011 07:38 AM PDT From I-Consult, a follow-up of this story I had linked to yesterday: Yesterday's posting raised the question of the number of Gaza civilians killed in the latest round of the Hamas-Israel war. The Times claimed "about half" of the 18 dead were civilians. In response, and after researching the background of each casualty, this blog concluded that only five were civilians (and at least four of them were in close proximity to rocket launches). The other 13 were fighters.
In response, the New York Times correspondent, Isabel Kershner, emailed today:
"You appear to base your assertion that four of them were Qassam fighters on a report from the Maan news agency. Our Gaza correspondent reported at the time that three of them were in fact non-combatants, but civilians collecting gravel from the old airport. There were two incidents of Israeli fire in the area that afternoon, one which killed a Hamas fighter, and another that killed the other three men." "Our Gaza correspondent has re-checked his information and says that the three are widely regarded in Gaza as having been non-combatants. No militant group has claimed them as members, which would be highly unusual if they indeed belonged to one. I personally have checked the Iz al-Din al-Qassam Arabic website, where fallen 'resistance fighters,' or Mujahadin, are honored. Only one is honored as having been killed on April 7 -- Saleh al-Tarabin." PCHR reported the incident this way: According to primary information made available to the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR), at approximately 16:00 on Thursday, 07 April 2011, Israeli forces targeted areas surrounding Gaza International Airport; Israeli forces positioned along the border fired approximately 10 artillery shells, while Apache helicopters opened machine gun fire. The Airport is located in the far southeast of Rafah city, in the southern Gaza Strip. A number of the artillery shells landed near three Palestinian civilians who were sitting near the Airport. Two of them were killed immediately and the third civilian died of his wounds on the evening of the same day. The dead are:
1. Mohammed Eyada Eid al-Mahmoum, 25;
2. Khaled Ismail Hamdan al-Dabari; 17;
3. Saleh Jarmi Ateya al-Tarabin, 38, who died of his wounds in Gaza European Hospital in Khan Younis city. We already know, and Kershner admits, that Tarabin was a Hamas Al Qassam member. We know from PCHR that all three of them were together. We also know that Hamas does not create martyr pages immediately after people are killed. Sometimes they wait years. Now, let's look at the Hamas-affiliated Palestine Times newspaper's reporting of an Al Qassam member who died of his wounds this morning - from the same attack at Rafah. The death of Mahdi Abu Mujahid Qassam Athra was announced on Thursday 14/04/2011.He died from injuries he suffered in the Zionist bombing targeted a group of fighters east of Rafah a week ago.
Abu Athra was wounded on Thursday 07/04/2011 from a Zionist artillery bombardment that targeted a group of insurgents in the "Fork" district east of Rafah, resulting in the immediate death of 3 members of the Qassam Brigades, and Abu Athra was critically injured, so his death was announced today. Here is a Hamas website that is agreeing with Ma'an in saying that the entire group of people targeted were fighters, and now we know that two of the four killed were claimed as "martyrs" by Hamas. The thought that the other two were civilians, hanging out with Hamas members at the airport, is untenable, especially in light of the Palestine Times and Ma'an reports. Kershner's source is not reliable, and the PCHR is proven again to lie about civilian casualties. 
|
| Report: Hamas stopping rockets Posted: 14 Apr 2011 06:46 AM PDT The (anti-Hamas) Palestine Press Agency reports that Hamas has been actively stopping rocket fire from Gaza. Starting yesterday, plainclothes Hamas members have been seeking out and stopping other parties from firing rockets, arresting them and placing them into "secret detention centers." They have been stopping and inspecting vehicles along the border, according to the report, all to enforce the current "truce." The pro-Fatah PalPress is generally accurate, although it has to rely on unofficial sources in Gaza. But it also tries to portray Hamas as colluding with the Zionist enemy, a charge that Hamas regularly hurls at Fatah. 
|
| Work accident! Plus more good news! Posted: 14 Apr 2011 05:50 AM PDT From Ma'an: The armed wing of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine said one of the group's fighters was killed Thursday morning, when an explosive device detonated while the young man was on a "jihad mission," a statement said.
It is the second accidental death of a Gaza resistance fighter reported in as many days, following the death of an Al-Qassam brigadesman in Khan Younis on Wednesday.
A DFLP statement said National Resistance Brigades fighter Khader Abu Elbeh, 22, was seriously wounded during an operation west of the Jabaliya area in the northern Gaza Strip and later died of his injuries. Palestine Times had reported that Elbeh mishandled a hand grenade and it exploded. But unless there is a public announcement that he was on a "jihad mission," he might miss out on his 70 virgins. The dead Al Qassam member, on the other hand, had the misfortune to die in a traffic accident. In other good news, one of the Hamas terrorists injured by an Israeli airstrike last week in Rafah has joined the virgins as well. PalTimes says that he was among a group of fighters. But PCHR claimed that every air strike in Rafah last week was against "civilians." 
|
| Suburb of Sydney boycotts Israel; cost to taxpayers: $3.7 million Posted: 14 Apr 2011 04:20 AM PDT From The Australian: A MOVE by a Greens-controlled council in Sydney's inner west to boycott goods and services from Israel will cost ratepayers at least $3.7 million and force the council to abandon Holden cars and Hewlett-Packard computers, among many other disruptions.
The stark warning on the cost of the council's decision to support the global boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign earlier this year is contained in a paper by the council's manager of services, Gary Moore, which is due for discussion next week and has been obtained by The Australian.
Marrickville, the only council in Australia that has approved an Israel boycott, has been a hotbed of political controversy since its Greens Mayor Fiona Byrne said she would push for a statewide version of the Israel boycott if elected to the NSW lower house at last month's election.
Mr Moore's paper details goods and services the council would have to forgo in order to comply with its directive, such as Hewlett Packard computers, Holden and Volvo cars, telephones and other equipment from Motorola and concrete from Fulton Hogan.
These companies, according to the council's original motion to join the global BDS movement, "support or profit from the Israeli military occupation of Palestine".
The report estimates the cost of replacing certain IT assets at $3.5m, and the annual cost of using a different concrete supplier at $250,000. It does not attempt to estimate the cost of replacing vehicles, and says changing waste-disposal service providers may not even be possible.
Mr Moore's paper admits staff have been unable to fully research ties between companies providing goods to the council and Israel and have largely relied on www.whoprofits.org - an anti-Israel website.
Independent councillor Victor Macri described the boycott plan as ludicrous. "We weren't elected to do this; we were elected to look after the streets and trees and pick up garbage," Mr Macri said.
"People vote federally to direct foreign policy. A boycott of Israel will hurt Marrickville ratepayers far more than it will Israel." Rarely have BDSers had the opportunity to look so stupid in front of so many. (h/t Faith) 
|
| Gaza accuses IDF of deliberately shooting a shell INTO a water tank Posted: 14 Apr 2011 03:16 AM PDT From Middle East Monitor: The Municipality of Gaza has criticized the Israeli occupation forces for targeting drinking water sources in the Gaza Strip as part of a deliberate policy. The municipality mentioned specifically the fact that Israeli forces attacked Al Mintar water tank and polluted its contents.
"Israeli tanks targeted Al Mintar water tank in Qibah, which supplies the eastern parts of the Shujaiyah neighbourhood," said a spokesperson in a press release. An artillery shell landed in the 12-metre long reservoir; this not only contaminated the water but also forced the municipality to stop pumping water from the tank, causing a water crisis in the district. Water is now being pumped from another tank in an effort to ease the crisis but the municipality said that there is still a severe water shortage.
Such an attack, claims the municipality, amounts to a "crime against humanity". It called on the international community to take on the responsibility of curbing Israeli aggression against Gaza. Sounds like a difficult shot to get an artillery shell to land inside a tank. Wouldn't it be easier just to bomb the thing? But those Jews are crafty, knowing that contaminating the water with an artillery shell will bring just the perfect amount of suffering to innocent Palestinian Arabs - no more, no less. I tried to find this tank on Google Maps. This is the only round structure I could find in the Quba (Qibah) neighborhood: It also happens to be one of the closest points to the Israeli border that has trees which could cover people shooting mortars or rockets. Here is how far the (possible) tank is from Nahal Oz in Israel (click to enlarge): While the Gaza press statement and other reports didn't detail the date that the water tank was hit, just saying it happened over the weekend, Islamic Jihad announced that it shot six mortars directly at Nahal Oz on Friday night, 7:18 PM. Two more groups announced they shot mortars or rockets towards Nahal Oz on Sunday. The area around that structure is the perfect launch area. But while Israel is under attack, no doubt the IDF is aiming its weapons to contaminate water inside a water tank, not at people shooting rockets. After all, it has to be guilty of "crimes against humanity," right? (h/t Cesar) 
|
אין תגובות:
הוסף רשומת תגובה