Civilian or Not? New Fight in Tallying the Dead From the Gaza Conflict

[King_David]

GAZA CITY — Inside the Health Sciences Library at Al-Shifa Hospital here, a small team spent the war crunching numbers. Stuck to their laptops were a statistician, a graphic designer, a data-entry specialist and an issuer of death certificates, some of whom spent nights sleeping in their straight-backed chairs.

By Tuesday, this is what they had come up with: 1,865 “martyrs” from “Israeli aggression” since July 6: 429 under age 18, 79 over 60, 243 women. The Palestinian Ministry of Health does not categorize victims as civilian or combatant, but others do: The United Nations — which had a lower death toll, 1,814 — said that at least 72 percent were civilians, while two Gaza-based groups put the percentage at 82 (Al Mezan Center for Human Rights) and 84 (the Palestinian Center for Human Rights).

Israel has a very different assessment. The military says it took the lives of 900 “terrorists,” but it did not provide specifics beyond the 368 cases listed in 28 entries on its blog. Politicians have been saying that 47 percent of the dead were fighters, citing a study by an Israeli counterterrorism group that is impressive in its documentation, using photographs and Internet tributes, but analyzes only the first 152 casualties, when the assault was exclusively from the air.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/08/06/world/middleeast/civilian-or-not-new-fight-in-tallying-the-dead-from-the-gaza-conflict.html?_r=2&referrer=

[intaglio]

1. Still trying to sell this piece of propaganda?

The only basis for the assumption that the male dead include more militants than is assumed. At best it is guesswork designed to make Israel's crimes seem more palatable.

[King_David]

2. There's a BBC article too,

I'm not selling anything .
I'm just an observer .

[intaglio]

5. Do you really think that anybody believes you are "just an observer"?

For whatever reason you post solely to support the Israeli view of matters. You give no indication of independent thought, just mindless acceptance of what, in other contexts would be "the party line". It was from the BBC report that I saw how the statistics were massaged by making unjustified assumptions about the proportions of young males killed in relation to females, a matter I pointed out in an earlier thread of yours.

[King_David]

6. Thank you for your insight into myself

Very helpful.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

7. The insight is dead on. You're as transparent as air.

[davidpdx]

8. A unanimous leave

On Sun Aug 17, 2014, 08:22 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

The insight is dead on. You're as transparent as air.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=77341

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

No comments added by alerter

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Aug 17, 2014, 08:35 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Had the alerter posted some comment as to the reason for the alert, perhaps I could find an insult worthy of censure. However it seems more like a ploy to contain another's opinion.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If you don't comment I won't hide
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Waste of time alert -- alerter should be given a timeout.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: ow
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

9. #5 says it the best.

Waste of time alert -- alerter should be given a timeout.

[azurnoir]

3. absolutely nothing new here

this is totally expected this also happens at least after cat Operation Cast Lead this time it's starting a bit early' we've already seen one attempt accomplished by insinuating any mail over 15 was a fighter but we can now expect to be raking over the dead and debating did they were they of fighter or not

[King_David]

4. Yep Hamas tries same bullshit every time

Caution needed with Gaza casualty figures
By Anthony Reuben
Head of statistics, BBC News

http://m.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28688179

[faisal akbar]

11. expected.

expected indeed.

[faisal akbar]

10. This article

that you cite is not news reporting. It is an Op-Ed by an Israeli. And he does not give much reason that the world media would be so fooled, beyond Hamas' intimidation. It is really hard to believe that the world media is so easily intimidated.

[sabbat hunter]

12. the author of the article

is not an Israeli, but a US citizen.

and it is not an Op-Ed piece, but a news article.

[DanTex]

13. So IDF killed between 900 and 1650 innocent civilians, depending on who you ask.

If we go with the UN's estimates, we get around 1300 innocent civilians killed.

Assessing the severity of the war crimes would of course be easier if Israel allowed human rights groups to examine the situation, but of course I'm sure the Likudniks here have some excuse for why that isn't happening either.

[King_David]

14. "Likudniks here "

Who are they ?

What's unbelievable is that if someone called anyone a Hamas supporter is a hidden post would result .

[DanTex]

15. I'm assuming that people who link to right-wing Israeli think tanks and make excuses for Bibi's

warmongering are supporters of Likud. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[King_David]

18. And do those linking to Mondoweiss

And to Maan and Electronic intifada and continually support the tunnel usage and deny the human shields and accept the casualty rates , to be considered Hamas Supporters ?

No need to correct me I'm hardly ever wrong .

[DanTex]

19. I'm not familiar with Mondoweiss and the others. Are those pro-Hamas websites?

There's a big difference between opposing Israeli war crimes and supporting Hamas war crimes, you know. I haven't yet seen anyone defend terrorism against Israeli citizens -- for example, nobody on DU that I know of is supportive of murdering those three teenagers. The split seems to be whether it's OK for Israel to murder Palestinians or not.

[DanTex]

21. Hmm, Mondoweiss.

Mondoweiss is a news website devoted to covering American foreign policy in the Middle East, chiefly from a progressive Jewish perspective.

A progressive Jewish perspective. Wow, that sounds horrible.

It's interesting that you even consider the progressive Jewish perspective to be too left-wing and "pro-Hamas". It's not even a Palestinian-based website!

[King_David]

24. Mondoweiss is Self described "progressive "

Anybody supporting Right Wing raving lunatics who hate Gays are anything but progressive/--- it ain't possible buddy.

[DanTex]

25. I haven't read much of Mondoweiss, but if there is homophobic content there, then I agree with you.

But, from what I've seen, they are actually opposed to the actions of right-wing lunatics like Netanyahu, unlike the right-wing think tanks that you keep citing. So it seems that it is accurately described as a progressive Jewish outlook.

[King_David]

26. I never did say there was homophobic content

I said Hamas were extreme homophobes and supporting this extremist right wing group was not progressive .

Can you point out which Israeli publications are put out by Likid .

Do you have a problem with Zionism?

[DanTex]

27. Mondoweiss isn't Hamas from what I can tell. It's a website with progressive Jewish views.

From what I've seen, that includes objecting to some of the brutal treatment of Israel towards Palestinians. I'm not sure what that has to do with homophobia.

On the other hand, two recent OPs here cite members of right-wing think tanks, sort of the equivalent of citing the Heritage Foundation on economic policy. I was under the impression that right-wing think tanks were frowned upon here at DU -- I guess things are different in I/P. I get the feeling that these aren't the only examples, that right-wing sources like these are common here, particularly when people are trying to defend military aggression, something that progressives are generally uncomfortable with.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/113477892
http://www.democraticunderground.com/113477267

Zionism? That's a complicated question. But Israel is there now, and has a right to be there, regardless of questionable actions that led to its existence. I feel the same way about the US.

[DanTex]

22. Maan News and Electronic Intifada. Actual Palestinian news outlets. I can see why you object.

Obviously, the only sources we should have access to should be Israeli and American. And even there, only right-wing voices should really be heard, because those leftys have a nasty habit of trying to see other perspectives.

[oberliner]

16. Numerous human rights groups are examining the situation

Palestinian Center for Human Rights, for example, has covered this quite extensively.

[DanTex]

17. I'm assuming that Likud claims any group associated with the Palestinians is in bed with Hamas.

And then they don't allow access to groups like HWR and Amnesty International. At least not as of yesterday.

[oberliner]

20. Likud is one of several parties in the Israeli governing coalition

I think it is a mistake to imply that they are are the only political party involved here.

The Israeli government has prevented HRW and Amnesty from entering Gaza via Israel.

They have let in other humanitarian relief groups, aid workers, and journalists, but they are wary of allowing these organizations in because I think they think they will present an unfair picture (not saying I agree - just positing as to their POV).

Why they don't enter Gaza from Egypt instead, I do not know. Presumably Egypt wouldn't allow them through either? I don't know if they have made such a request.

There are groups like the one i mentioned above who are already based in Gaza and who have reported extensively on these issues. The Palestinian Center for Human Rights being among them. I am sure that the Israeli government views them suspiciously as well.

There is no denying that civilians have been killed. No one in Likud or any other party in Israel is pretending otherwise. Their argument is that they are trying to target militants, doing what they can to warn civilians to get out of the way, but not allowing themselves to be hamstrung by such considerations in pursuit of their military objectives.

I do not think it is fair to say that Israel is simply slaughtering children for kicks, but I also don't think it's fair to say that Israel is doing everything it can to avoid civilian casualties. Or indeed really doing much at all. And for that they should be condemned. You can't expect to launch attacks that lead to the deaths of, in more than a few cases, infants, and just say "oh well" and expect not to be criticized about it.

[faisal akbar]

23. a lot

That is an awful lot of civilian death.