Apparently Abu deleted this previously because I did not respond quickly enough with quotes of him calling every dead Muslim militant he could think of an innocent civilian (either that, or not actually a Muslim), even though there were two ongoing discussions in different threads where he was making these claims over and over again. So anyway, here it is a gain, with a few recent quotes from Abu.
Quote:Abu has recently explained to us that a Palestinian firing rockets into a residential area should be classed as an innocent civilian. It is the same with a Pakistani militant trying to shut down girls schools and kill students, Afghani militants slaughtering their own countrymen and laying roadside bombs etc. This concept initially came under discussion in the thread about statistics from drone strikes in Pakistan - the percentage of innocent civilian deaths vs 'target' deaths.
Abu, could you please elaborate on this "innocent civilian" thing? For example, is a non-Muslim in Israel who gets hit by an unguided rocket also counted as an innocent civilian? Who was the last Muslim militant who you would not consider to be both a civilian and innocent?
abu_rashid wrote on Nov 23
rd, 2012 at 5:56am:
freediver wrote on Nov 22
nd, 2012 at 6:36pm:
Abu, if a Palestinian fires a rocket into Israel from the rooftop of his apartment building, and makes it back to his kitchen within 30 seconds (time taken for Israeli return fire) to cook breakfast for his children, should his death be considered that of an innocent civilian?
Even if he is shot still firing his weapon, he is an innocent civilian, as Palestinians, like Afghanis, Pakinstanis, Yemenis and others are occupied and invaded peoples. They are not soldiers, they are just average people (ie. civilians) trying to defend their homes, families and freedom from war-mongering dogs.
And that applies to Palestinian Christians as well, it has nothing to do with your ludicrous diversion claiming all Muslims are innocent just because they're Muslims.
abu_rashid wrote on Nov 24
th, 2012 at 9:49am:
freediver wrote on Nov 23
rd, 2012 at 8:51am:
Was Muhammed also an innocent civilian Abu?
In which respect? When the Makkans besieged him and attempted to assassinate him, yes he was a civilian. When he went to war against them, then he was a combatant I guess. The former was the norm though, not the latter. Contrary to your delusions above, Muhammad (pbuh) did not usually instigate hostilities, and when he did, like with the conquest of Makkah, it was almost completely bloodless. Please read some history.
abu_rashid wrote on Nov 24
th, 2012 at 1:41pm:
And let us not forget that as we speak, the brave resistance fighters of Afghanistan, are currently putting the world's sole standing superpower to shame, not only that, she has brought with her an alliance of the world's best equipped armies. And one by one they are scampering back to their own lands, unable to defeat the brave fighters of Afghanistan.
And on top of that, the Afghans are fresh out of fighting the second last standing world superpower only a few decades ago, again sending them home defeated.
Abu still won't admit that these 'statistics' are completely made up:
abu_rashid wrote on Nov 4
th, 2012 at 8:24pm:
US drone attacks in Pakistan kill 98% innocent civilians: Analyst
A prominent American journalist says recent studies show that 98 percent of people killed in US assassination drone strikes in Pakistan are innocent civilians.
on Nov 5
th, 2012 at 9:04pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 5
th, 2012 at 12:27pm:
sorry to say Abu, but you've been duped.
I have not been duped, I'm simply posting a news article.
polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 5
th, 2012 at 12:27pm:
Nowhere in the Stanford and GJC study is a civilian-militant ratio of 50 to 1 mentioned. The Daily Mail literally just made that up.
It does state only 2% are actual militant leaders. The rest are presumed to be civilians. As resistance movements to foreign occupations are usually just civilians who defend their lands, in my opinion they're all civilians anyway, so in my estimation, the 2% is still too high, they're all civilians.
polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 5
th, 2012 at 12:27pm:
Unfortunately, by relying on this false claim, your press TV article loses all credibility.
PressTV like any other media outlet just reports what it finds, presenting it in a way that serves its ideological bent. Nothing new there, nothing all other media agencies don't do.
This one is particularly funny - I have never heard of soldier knocking off at 5 and expecting the enemy to leave them alone:
abu_rashid wrote on Nov 5
th, 2012 at 9:10pm:
Big Dave wrote on Nov 5
th, 2012 at 4:31am:
Go OUT IN THE DESERT YOU COWARDS?
Are you saying anyone who does not sit in the middle of a desert waiting patiently to be killed is a coward? Are you suggesting that attacking soldiers in their homes when they're not fighting, is legitimate?
abu_rashid wrote on Nov 6
th, 2012 at 3:41pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 6
th, 2012 at 10:09am:
it quoted a study which claimed that:
Quote:The number of “high-level” targets killed as a percentage of total casualties is extremely low—estimated at just 2%.
"high level" targets do not account for total numbers of targeted non-civilians. How do we know this? Because the only estimate of civilian casualties cited in the whole paper gives a ratio not even remotely close to that:
Quote:The best currently available public aggregate data on drone strikes are provided by The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ), an independent journalist organization. TBIJ reports that from June 2004 through mid-September 2012, available data indicate that drone strikes killed 2,562-3,325 people in Pakistan, of whom 474-881 were civilians, including 176 children.[3]
Obviously this is not even remotely close to either a 1:49 ratio, or a 98% civilian death rate.
Here's
another which states that for every militant killed, 10 civilians die.
Anyway, as I stated, in my opinion ALL of them are civilians. Even those bearing arms, are civilians, merely taking up arms to defend themselves against these invading dogs.
polite_gandalf wrote on Nov 6
th, 2012 at 10:09am:
Any news agency that publishes blatantly false information loses credibility. Its as simple as that. This article not only repeats a blatantly false claim about a reputable study, it also quotes someone who is making equally outrageously false claims. How do you suppose this sort of sloppy journalism is benefiting the muslim cause Abu? It will take people 2 seconds to realise the claims made about civilian casualties are false, and suddenly no one will bother digesting the really important points in the report.
All news agencies do this. I'm guessing you don't read any news then.
abu_rashid wrote on Nov 6
th, 2012 at 8:27pm:
Big Dave wrote on Nov 6
th, 2012 at 6:50pm:
Why don't you mention the thousands of civilians killed by muslims in Syria right now? But you muslims are always selective when it comes to the kafur.
Clearly you're not even aware of what's going on there. Secularist atheist/alawites are the ones killing civilians (mostly mainstream orthodox Muslims).
abu_rashid wrote on Nov 9
th, 2012 at 9:49pm:
freediver wrote on Nov 9
th, 2012 at 7:46am:
Abu do you have an opinion on the statistics and the original article you posted? Why did you post it? To point out how easy it is to fool the Islamic apologists?
The statistics are undisputed, except by U.S government agencies, for obvious reasons.
The only issue with the original article is perhaps its wording. Fact is the overwhelming majority of casualties of drone strikes are civilians (by all standards), and I've posted links to other articles anyway, did you read them? Or did you just read one rebuttal and run with it (as per usual)???
abu_rashid wrote on Nov 10
th, 2012 at 7:14am:
As I've stated, in my opinion 100% of them are civilians. The so called "militants" are just civilians who are trying to defend their homes from the dogs that are invading them.
abu_rashid wrote on Nov 11
th, 2012 at 9:13am:
Yes, all independent investigations of these strikes have concluded the vast overwhelming majority of them kill almost exclusively civilians (by anyone's definition).
abu_rashid wrote on Nov 11
th, 2012 at 11:20am:
Big Dave wrote on Nov 11
th, 2012 at 9:38am:
How many civilians were killed by muslims in Syria this last week?
I dunno, ask your Western ally Assad, he's the one killing them all.
Forum
Pages: 1
"innocent civilian" (Read 1386 times)
