Lieber Code: Palestinian Conduct is “Infamous and Fiendish”
Laws of war define terrorists’ use of protected places like hospitals and mosques as “infamous” and “fiendish”
by Bill Levinson
The Lieber Code of 1863 was introduced during the American Civil War in an effort to reduce some of the less civilized aspects of war such as refusing to grant quarter, use of poisons, and holding of prisoners for ransom. It apparently served as a precedent for the more-familiar Hague and Geneva Conventions of today. It defined explicitly the current practices of Palestinian terrorists, such as their use of hospitals, mosques, ambulances, and the Church of the Nativity as fighting positions or ammunition depots as “infamous” and “fiendish.”
- 115. It is customary to designate by certain flags (usually yellow) the hospitals in places which are shelled, so that the besieging enemy may avoid firing on them. The same has been done in battles when hospitals are situated within the field of the engagement.
116. Honorable belligerents often request that the hospitals within the territory of the enemy may be designated, so that they may be spared.
An honorable belligerent allows himself to be guided by flags or signals of protection as much as the contingencies and the necessities of the fight will permit.
117. It is justly considered an act of bad faith, of infamy or fiendishness, to deceive the enemy by flags of protection. Such act of bad faith may be good cause for refusing to respect such flags.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Aryeh ben Avraham, Mr. Gerson. Mr. Gerson said: [Reader] Lieber Code: Palestinian Conduct is “Infamous and Fiendish” http://twurl.nl/yd52ev [...]
Pingback by Tweets that mention Israpundit » Blog Archive » Lieber Code: Palestinian Conduct is “Infamous and Fiendish” -- Topsy.com — December 1, 2009 @ 2:27 am
See, we use to get it.
Comment by RandyTexas — December 1, 2009 @ 6:11 am
This misses the point. It was infamous and fiendish to exterminate six million Jews, but no one objected then, either…least of all American Jewry. When it comes to Israel’s annihilation, the world seeks results regardless of the means.
Now, if the Palestinians used protected places like hospitals and mosques to kill pandas, well, then you would have yourself an international outcry.
Assuming, of course, that the pandas weren’t Jewish.
Comment by ayn reagan — December 1, 2009 @ 1:38 pm
This misses the point.
“Never again!” remember that “again” has already happened.
The UN partition plan of 1947 was no boon to Jews, but meant to complete the Final Solution. The Jewish state was broken into three isolated enclaves, interspersed with Arab territory. The three “Jewish” enclaves contained 40 percent Arab populations. Thus the UN Security Council’s Christian members ensured attacks on Israel both from without and from within. The Jews were to be annihilated.
Nothing has changed since the Holocaust. In 1967, as the Arab armies were massing at Israel’s borders, as the IDF was digging thousands of graves open for Jewish bodies, as common Israelis thought in terms of the Holocaust—what did the world do? Nothing. Nasser and the Syrians were explicit about their intentions to annihilate all the Jews rather than merely dismantle the Zionist state. The world screamed at Israel in disappointment when she preempted and survived.
In 1973, as the Egyptian army was seemingly poised to enter Tel Aviv in a matter of days, the American Jewish leaders did not lead mass rallies demanding US intervention: America, after all, had fought on behalf of Koreans, Vietnamese, and Kuwaitis. European Jewish leaders did not chain themselves to presidential palaces in their respective capitals to demand the right of overfly for Israeli resupply aircraft: Europe closed its skies to the military supplies desperately procured by the fledging Jewish state. When the world, including Jewish assimilationist organizations, beats its collective chest and says, “Never again!” remember that “again” has already happened.
In 1947, the US originally voted for establishing the Jewish state. When fighting between Arabs and Jews subsequently flared up, the US withdrew its UN vote in favor of Israel, leaving the Jewish state one-on-one with Arab militias. To add insult to injury, the US banned American Jews from going to Israel to fight, and embargoed arms shipments to Palestine. That didn’t affect the Arabs, who received arms supplies through other ports—notably in Egypt—and from Iraq and Syria. In effect, the arms embargo targeted Israel. The US voted for the UNSC resolution condemning Soviet arms shipments to Israel.
The US reiterated its policy of annihilating Israel in 1956. After Israel, besieged by fedayeen attacks for eight years, cleansed Sinai of the Egyptian militia, the US intervened, ordered Israel to halt, offered military aid to Egypt, and threatened direct intervention on Egypt’s behalf. Eisenhower pressed Israel to withdraw from the Sinai, promising the US would always intervene to keep the Tiran Straits open. He lied; in 1967 America not only refused intervention on Israel’s behalf, but prepared operational plans for landing the US Navy in the Sinai to defend Egypt against the Jewish army. Before the Six-Day War, US foreign policy was geared toward buying Egypt time to launch an offensive against Israel. The US-led UN withdrew its peacekeeping troops from the Sinai immediately upon Nasser’s demand.
In 1973, the US intervened only to counter the Soviet influence in the Middle East which grew exponentially with Egypt’s early victories and Soviet deployment of nuclear missiles in defense of Egypt. The US aid to Israel came too late to be used in the war. European Christian countries—NATO members—refused flyover rights to US planes, preventing military supplies from reaching the Jewish state.
The US provides massive aid to the PLO, which is nominally intended for the terrorist Palestinian Authority. America sells advanced weapons to Egypt and Saudi Arabia, fakes nuclear disarmament of North Korea, and uses Israel as a pawn to placate Arabs with the suicidal peace process.
Bush was touted as the US president most favorable to Israel. Roosevelt, too, was very friendly to Jews—but did nothing to stop the Holocaust. Truman was very favorable to Jews, yet he almost killed the newborn Israel with an arms embargo. Decades later, Jews were surprised to discover anti-Semitic remarks in Truman’s diary.
The current peace process is a historically standard policy against the Jews. Locked into a fourteen-mile-wide state, besieged by US-armed Arabs from without, watched by the fifth column of a 34 percent Arab population from within, the Jewish state is meant by the Quartet to become the Final Solution.
Laws of war concept is a form of Black Humor, Only the weak are made and measured but such artificial standards. The powerful are always exempt.
Comment by yamit82 — December 1, 2009 @ 3:30 pm
Randy Trivia Question but has a moralistic point:
Where did the name Yellow Rose of Texas originate?
Ans. The Jews or specifically a Jew.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdmjbxMs7hg
Original song
He’s Moses Rose of Texas,
and today nobody knows,
he’s the one who left the Alamo,
the night before the foe
came storming in up across the walls
and killed the men inside,
but Moses Rose of Texas
is the one who never died.
ROSE, LOUIS [MOSES] (1785–1851). Louis (Moses) Rose, a soldier of fortune who escaped from the Alamo and contributed to its legends, was born on May 11, 1785, in Laferée, Ardennes, France. He joined Napoleon’s 101st Regiment in 1806 and eventually became a lieutenant. In 1814 he was named to the French Legion of Honor for his role as aide-de-camp to Gen. Jacques de Monfort. He served in campaigns in Naples, Portugal, and Spain as well as in the invasion of Russia. Though no one knows when or where he entered North America, he settled in Nacogdoches, Texas, about 1827. There he was employed as a log cutter and hauler at a sawmill owned by John Durst and Frost Thorn and served as a messenger between Nacogdoches and Natchitoches, Louisiana. He joined the Fredonian Rebellion in 1826 and took part in the battle of Nacogdoches in 1832. Rose was a friend of James Bowie and accompanied or followed him to the Alamo in the fall of 1835. He fought in the siege of Bexar that year.
Rose served the cause of Texas independence a fourth time during the siege of the Alamo. He fought for ten days, up to three days before the fall of the fort, and then escaped. He is the source of the story about William B. Travis’s drawing a line in the dirt with his sword. Rose got the nickname Moses because of his age at the time, fifty-one. When asked, “Moses, why didn’t you stay there in the Alamo with the others?” he invariably replied, “By God, I wasn’t ready to die.”
Smart Jew, not suicidal and not a coward!! Rose appropriately declined to sacrifice his life in a losing cause.
Rose fled the Alamo the night of March 5, evading Mexican forces resting for the next morning’s assault, and made his way to Grimes County, Texas, where he was granted rest and shelter at the family homestead of one William P. Zuber. The legendary account provides that Rose made no attempt at hiding the true story of his journey, attributing his decision to a love for his family (including his children) and desire to fight another day rather than face a slaughter like he had seen in previous failed battles. According to the legend, Rose did not fight another day, but instead merely faded away from the revolution, eventually settling in Logansport, Louisiana.
Comment by yamit82 — December 1, 2009 @ 4:22 pm
Uncle, what a lousy track record the US government has towards Israel. Good grief.
I am naive and I know it mostly due to lack of knowledge of the Middle East and lack of media attention and revelation provided to the public.
Am I wrong is stating a number of times the need for a good PR program by Israel to enlighten Americans as to what direction the US government is going with respects to treatment of Israel and her people?
I only wish I were a lot smarter to understand all of this. I can only judge what I see and it’s not a pretty picture. I see a tiny giant nation being attacked by every measure conceivable for no good reason.
Jews are not out to conquer the world or seize other lands, no I see a nation who is a defender of her rights to live in the land provided by G-d.
Uncle you are correct, if the US saw fit to defend South Korea, Vietnam, Kuwait why then not our true and trusted ally, Israel a true democracy in the ME.
No, the US government sees fit to arm and supply these non-democratic Arab nations with the worlds worst human rights violations and by the way don’t like us no more than they like Israel.
This sucks.
Worst of all liberal Americans Jews sit Idly by and support the very government officials who are behind these actions.
I would advocate Israel establish a PR program in the form of a comparison of the Plus and Minus, (1) of US action towards Israel and likewise another (2) for what Israel provides the US.
I am sure in the case of (1) the minus column will well exceed the plus side and likewise in the case of (2) the plus side will well exceed the minus.
Comment by rongrand — December 1, 2009 @ 4:27 pm
Ron I think LBJ might be considered the only President who really liked Jews and did something considered to be altruistic for them but that was mainly before he became President. Americas record vis a vis Israel, always was at best and only from the historical record, duplicitous even devilish.
Obama is only the last in a long line of American administrations that screw their friends when they feel it incumbent to do so and reward her enemies. Moral: It pays to be America foe than her friend.
Comment by yamit82 — December 1, 2009 @ 5:04 pm
Re: #4
“Nasser and the Syrians were explicit about their intentions to annihilate all the Jews rather than merely dismantle the Zionist state. The world screamed at Israel in disappointment when she preempted and survived.”
The best way for Israel to deter militant “Muslims” from doing more than talking about killing all the Jews is to make it clear that the attempt would mean the end of 90 percent or more of the human life in the country responsible, the possible incineration of Mecca, and possibly the end of the Palestinians and Syrians as well. I’m pretty sure that nuclear-armed India would do the same if militant “Muslims” decided they were going to wipe out all the Hindus. If Israel has a handful of nuclear weapons, it needs to build more–a lot more–to make sure it can in fact kill several hundred million people if that is what it takes to protect its existence. The United States must similarly make it clear what will happen to Iran if that country uses a nuclear weapon on us, or gives one to terrorists who use it on us.
Comment by Bill Levinson — December 1, 2009 @ 8:39 pm
Levinson, this is one of the few comments of yours I totally agree with: To add to your concept here is why I believe most of the Bullshit world pressure is invited by all Israeli governments.
According to all knowledgeable sources at the time of Vannunu over 20 years ago, Israel had around 200 war heads of different types and yields. It’s estimated that Israel produces 5-20 per year x 20 gives Israel today something between250 to 500 warheads, artillery nuked shells and sea launched nuke cruise missiles in our five German built subs. Israel has more subs on order and may build some herself it’s a ten-15 year project. A combination between our Jericho ICBM’s, IAF, our 5 Nuclear armed subs means that Israel can hit any target on the globe.
Possible targets mecca of course, all the Saudi and gulf state oil fields, Iraqi Oil fields, All of Syria and lebanon, Most of Iran including all the oil fields. Moscow and the Siberian oil fields, Washington Houston, LA, Chicago and NY. Alaskan oil fields London, Paris, Amsterdam Stockholm, Madrid
The Aswan Dam out all of Egypt under a 100 feet of water.
3-5 hundred nukes can put all of civilization back to the stone age. The pollution from un -extinguished oil fields will put the earth in a new ice age it will block the sun and kill all life forms.
This is the power Israel has. It is incredible that we allow if if as a fig leaf anyone to dictate to us anything. We should be the one who is dictating.. The Arabs use oil as leverage and should use the concept of denying oil by destroying them as our leverage.
Israel doesn’t even need a large standing land Army or investing in obscenely expensive weapons when we could destroy with tactical nukes any land invasion. Napalm works well against terrorists and is very cheap and very effective. Israel could invest the difference in the real economy it would free up tens of billions a year. Israel should state publicly that any missiles or rocket detected coming our way from any source will be nuked in reply on first detection by radar. We will preempt against any attempt by any of our enemies or immediate neighbors if they are detected building or developing Nukes.
This should be our policy and along with increasing our sub sleets More and improved Jericho ICBM’s replace American aircraft with cheap Russian fighters co produced here in Israel the look of Israel and our projected image of don’t mess with the Jews would change not only the ME but the world.
We are not a powerless banana republic even though we have governments who act like one.
Comment by yamit82 — December 1, 2009 @ 11:14 pm
True. This is why hashemi rafsanjani could be considered a “moderate” by western governments although he publicly advocated the nuclear annihilation of Israel when he said that one nuclear bomb would destroy Israel while it would only damage the muslim world. This is an obvious call for a first strike against Israel even though it would result in a retaliatory strike on Iran. Western governments regard as muslim extremists those who want to obliterate them, on the other hand a “moderate” muslim is one who only wants to obliterate Israel, hence rafsanjani is considered a moderate by the standard of western elites.
Comment by Laura — December 1, 2009 @ 11:33 pm
The important idea of apocalypse figures scripturally in both Judaism and Christianity, but it very likely appeared for the very first time among the Zoroastrians in ancient Persia. Interestingly, this is basically the same region as modern day Iran. For President Ahmadinejad, there could be recognizably great beauty in transforming the “World of War” into the “World of Islam.” For him, “ therefore, an “end of the world” spawned by such transformation could open the way for life everlasting. With this in mind, it should come as no surprise that the Iranian leader may already be waiting excitedly for the apocalypse.
An Israeli nuclear preemption could be expected only if: (1) Israel’s enemy or enemies had unexpectedly acquired nuclear or other unconventional weapons presumed capable of destroying the Jewish State; (2) this enemy state had been forthright that its genocidal intentions paralleled its capabilities; (3) this state was reliably believed ready to begin a final countdown-to-launch; and (4) Israel believed that non-nuclear preemptions could not possibly achieve levels of damage-limitation consistent with its own national survival. To reject this particular argument on Israeli nuclear preemption as impossible or implausible would require an antecedent assumption that self-preservation is simply not Israel’s highest priority.
Comment by yamit82 — December 2, 2009 @ 12:31 am
Re: #10
“True. This is why hashemi rafsanjani could be considered a “moderate” by western governments although he publicly advocated the nuclear annihilation of Israel when he said that one nuclear bomb would destroy Israel while it would only damage the muslim world.”
Then Israel obviously needs more than one nuclear bomb; Mecca, Damascus, and Tehran are hundreds of miles apart, and could not even be serviced by a single multiple warhead ballistic missile.
Comment by Bill Levinson — December 2, 2009 @ 12:50 am
Re: #9
“The Aswan Dam out all of Egypt under a 100 feet of water.”
Could and should have been done, even with conventional bombs, in 1973. Usually it’s three strikes and you’re out, but 1973 was Egypt’s fourth act of aggression within 25 years.
Comment by Bill Levinson — December 2, 2009 @ 12:52 am
Then this presents a rare and treasured opportunity to disagree with you both.
If that means I must take the other side and advocate jihad, it is a small enough price to pay…
Comment by ayn reagan — December 2, 2009 @ 1:19 am
Then you must declare in a loud strident voice ( you do have a loud and strident voice?) Alu Akbar
Latest Fatwa: All Jewish and American poultry Must Die – Alu Akbar!
Comment by yamit82 — December 2, 2009 @ 1:48 am
I’ll join briefly, if we can do the chicken fried when were done. However, I think I’ll have to stick with ‘Texas Akbar!’ My accent doesn’t make the cut in Arabic.
Comment by RandyTexas — December 2, 2009 @ 4:25 am
I always shout “Foghorn Leghorn Akbar” whenever I detonate explosives at a KFC.
Comment by ayn reagan — December 2, 2009 @ 1:21 pm
Henhouse Henery Part 1 and 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is9cW0IC_GE&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0Ur5Vd__wM&feature=related
Comment by yamit82 — December 2, 2009 @ 3:08 pm
2 Israelis lightly hurt in West Bank stabbing attack
Israeli man, woman sustain light injuries after being stabbed by terrorist near a ‘Paz’ gas station in West Bank town of Kiryat Arba. Assailant in critical condition after being shot by soldier. ‘This is the result of government’s weak policy,’ Jewish settlement spokesman says
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3811321,00.html
Man who ran over terrorist suspected of attempted murder
Footage shows husband of woman stabbed in Kiyat Arba gas station last week repeatedly run over motionless terrorist with his Mercedes; suspect held under house arrest
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3813750,00.html
David Mizrahi, whose wife Tamar was injured in a terror attack last week at the entrance to Kiryat Arba, is suspected of attempted murder after he ran over the terrorist with his car, many times, back and forth.
Comment by yamit82 — December 2, 2009 @ 11:32 pm
I suspect him of heroism.
Comment by ayn reagan — December 3, 2009 @ 12:42 am
[...] http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=18717 December 1, 2009 Lieber Code: Palestinian Conduct is ?Infamous and Fiendish? Laws of war define terrorists? use of protected places like hospitals and mosques as ?infamous? and ?fiendish? by Bill Levinson The Lieber Code of 1863 was introduced during the American Civil War in an effort to reduce some of the less civilized aspects of war such as refusing to grant quarter, use of poisons, and holding of prisoners for ransom. It apparently served as a precedent for the more-familiar Hague and Geneva Conventions of today. It defined explicitly the current practices of Palestinian terrorists, such as their use of hospitals, mosques, ambulances, and the Church of the Nativity as fighting positions or ammunition depots as ?infamous? and ?fiendish.? 115. It is customary to designate by certain flags (usually yellow) the hospitals in places which are shelled, so that the besieging enemy may avoid firing on them. The same has been done in battles when hospitals are situated within the field of the engagement. 116. Honorable belligerents often request that the hospitals within the territory of the enemy may be designated, so that they may be spared. An honorable belligerent allows himself to be guided by flags or signals of protection as much as the contingencies and the necessities of the fight will permit. 117. It is justly considered an act of bad faith, of infamy or fiendishness, to deceive the enemy by flags of protection. Such act of bad faith may be good cause for refusing to respect such flags. [...]
Pingback by Goldstone's Mein Kampf and Terrorists' self-confidence - Page 3 — December 17, 2009 @ 10:56 am