Reply #19: i've read parts of it as it's nearly 600 pages long

[shira]

their absurd conclusion - no evidence of Hamas using civilians as shields - which defies the UN's own definition on human shields.

http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/glossary/h.htm

human shield - any person who, under the laws of war is considered a non-combattant and as such protected from deliberate attack (civilians, POWs, etc.) but who is used by one side as a hostage to deter the other side from striking a particular military target and risking killing the hostages; the side using "human shields" gambles on the other side's reluctance to violate the laws of war and on its fear of the moral and political opprobrium usually attached to such violations; the use of human shields can take the form of a) placing civilians or prisoners in or near legitimate military targets (bases, bunkers, weapons factories, etc.) or b) placing artillery batteries and other offensive weapons in the midst of the civilian population, particularly such buildings as hospitals, schools, churches, etc., or residential neighborhoods, or c) for non-uniformed armed groups, firing at their adversary from among a crowd of civilians

thus, this report is a completely dishonest hoax posing as serious study - as Hamas' clearly illegal battle strategies are rewarded and Hamas takes no blame for civilian deaths (instead Israel does).

it's astounding that you don't immediately recognize the utter dishonesty here.