Adavardes Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 Several other Conservative Bloggers had a field day back in 2006, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarfieldJL Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 because they're not the angels you make them out to be and as i've said before, they're just as genocidal as hamas. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=360533&contrassID=2&subContrassID=1&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=Y http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE50C1Z920090113 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXq57XK2L0A whoops none of those were fox news or littlegreenfootballs links just links to israeli sources and reuters And reuters has absolutely no credibility whatsoever. Your stating that Israel wants to commit genocide doesn't take into account the fact the Israelis are bending over backward to avoid civilian casualties. Furthermore the links from those bloggers were largely concerning issues from 2000-2006 to show a pattern as to why reuters is not a credible source when it comes to Israel. If they had intel on a weapons depot or something like that they may have acted to take it out, they wouldn't launch shells into Gaza to target civilians indiscriminately which you're implying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrrtoken Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 And reuters has absolutely no credibility whatsoever. Your stating that Israel wants to commit genocide doesn't take into account the fact the Israelis are bending over backward to avoid civilian casualties.Okay. Then I'd like you to explain this: Total Israeli Civilian Casualties: 3 Total Gazan Civilian Casualites: ~700 If they had intel on a weapons depot or something like that they may have acted to take it out, they wouldn't launch shells into Gaza to target civilians indiscriminately which you're implying.Really? I suppose that white phosphorous, which its intended use is for a smokescreen, but white phosphorous causes extreme burns, with an almost napalm-esque effect. You know those air bursts that look like fireworks pellets raining down on the ground? That's white phosphorous. It's not an "OK" weapon to use, at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarfieldJL Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Okay. Then I'd like you to explain this: Total Israeli Civilian Casualties: 3 Total Gazan Civilian Casualites: ~700 Possibilities: That members of Hamas would have trouble hitting the broadside of a barn at point-blank range. -- unlikely Divine Intervention -- Certainly possible, given the number of rockets fired Israel actually evactuates its Citizens to shelters to try to protect them from harm while Hamas deliberately puts their weapons among civilians to maximize civilian deaths for propaganda purposes. I'd say it would be 3, with possibly divine intervention as well. Really? I suppose that white phosphorous, which its intended use is for a smokescreen, but white phosphorous causes extreme burns, with an almost napalm-esque effect. You know those air bursts that look like fireworks pellets raining down on the ground? That's white phosphorous. It's not an "OK" weapon to use, at all. To be frank, based on Reuter's, BBC's, etc. track record, the usage of phosphorous by the Israelis has likely been greatly exagerated, if they used it at all. Oh a video of interest: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=351_1231430391 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted January 21, 2009 Author Share Posted January 21, 2009 And reuters has absolutely no credibility whatsoever. Your stating that Israel wants to commit genocide doesn't take into account the fact the Israelis are bending over backward to avoid civilian casualties. Furthermore the links from those bloggers were largely concerning issues from 2000-2006 to show a pattern as to why reuters is not a credible source when it comes to Israel. If they had intel on a weapons depot or something like that they may have acted to take it out, they wouldn't launch shells into Gaza to target civilians indiscriminately which you're implying. i also cited haaretz and that video had a woman from b'tselem, an israeli human rights group. your "all european sources are unreliable" argument is irrelevant. and israel has admitted to using phosphorous weapons in the past and there have been numerous reports of them using it this time around. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7831424.stm http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0114/p07s01-wome.html http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/01/10/israel-stop-unlawful-use-white-phosphorus-gaza http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/jan-june09/ceasefire_01-19.html http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1231866575577&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull also white phosphorous can cause organ failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrrtoken Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 That members of Hamas would have trouble hitting the broadside of a barn at point-blank range. -- unlikelyIf they're using sucky weaponry, which they are, then I guess it would be possible. Divine Intervention -- Certainly possible, given the number of rockets firedSeeing as how many times the Israelites have generally screwed up everything for the past several thousand years, I doubt that God really really cares about them too much, especially when they throw his teachings out of the window repeatedly. Israel actually evactuates its Citizens to shelters to try to protect them from harm while Hamas deliberately puts their weapons among civilians to maximize civilian deaths for propaganda purposes.You want to know why there are so many Gazan causalities? Israel takes the bait, probably with the knowledge that there were civilians in the area. To be frank, based on Reuter's, BBC's, etc. track record, the usage of phosphorous by the Israelis has likely been greatly exaggerated, if they used it at all.Alright. That sure explains why we're seeing several air bursts which most definitely contain white phosphorous. It also explains why Gazan doctors are seeing patients with burns extremely similar to white phosphorous burns. Oh, and I also think that you're throwing the truth out the window to strengthen your hate of the mainstream and liberal media. Oh a video of interest: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=351_1231430391 So? we've known about this for quite some time. Why do you think Israel goes for it? Since your claim that Israel has the world's leading intelligence agency is true, I suppose this means that Israel knows that civilians are being used as human shields. And if that is true, then Israel is deliberately targeting civilians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarfieldJL Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 If they're using sucky weaponry, which they are, then I guess it would be possible. And fired over 6000+ of them... Seriously, there is another factor in this than just lousy weapons. Seeing as how many times the Israelites have generally screwed up everything for the past several thousand years, I doubt that God really really cares about them too much, especially when they throw his teachings out of the window repeatedly. Does the Six Day War ring any bells or Yom Kippur? You want to know why there are so many Gazan causalities? Israel takes the bait, probably with the knowledge that there were civilians in the area. Israel faces a choice in each situation, and Israel is smaller than the State of Massachusetts, they have nowhere to retreat. Alright. That sure explains why we're seeing several air bursts which most definitely contain white phosphorous. It also explains why Gazan doctors are seeing patients with burns extremely similar to white phosphorous burns. Oh, and I also think that you're throwing the truth out the window to strengthen your hate of the mainstream and liberal media. Show me the burn victims, seriously, there are other chemicals that can create air bursts or smoke screens. Furthermore, I've already shown that Reuters used pictures that were photoshopped to add fake smoke in 2006. It isn't that much of a strech to assume the same situation now only in video. So? we've known about this for quite some time. Why do you think Israel goes for it? Since your claim that Israel has the world's leading intelligence agency is true, I suppose this means that Israel knows that civilians are being used as human shields. And if that is true, then Israel is deliberately targeting civilians. And here is the choice the Israelis face, let them continue shooting rockets and pray one of them doesn't hit a family member, a neighbor, a friend, or take the rocket launch site out. That's the situation they're in, this isn't Canada we're talking about here where a bunch of inaccurate rockets are more likely to hit a Moose than a person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted January 21, 2009 Author Share Posted January 21, 2009 Israel faces a choice in each situation, and Israel is smaller than the State of Massachusetts, they have nowhere to retreat.this is one of the most ridiculous arguments in this thread. to suggest that israel would ever need to retreat anywhere shows near complete ignorance of the situation there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adavardes Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Possibilities: That members of Hamas would have trouble hitting the broadside of a barn at point-blank range. -- unlikely Divine Intervention -- Certainly possible, given the number of rockets fired Israel actually evactuates its Citizens to shelters to try to protect them from harm while Hamas deliberately puts their weapons among civilians to maximize civilian deaths for propaganda purposes. I'd say it would be 3, with possibly divine intervention as well. You want to talk about nonsensical religious dogma, you go to the appropriate place for it, which is not here. You want to talk about the facts, then let's talk about the facts. There has been link after link for sources given in this topic that portray a clear and present use of overkill in Israel's "defense". They are murdering Hamas citizens, regardless of whether or not Hamas has put them in a position to be murdered. Both sides in this are WRONG. Israel is no more justified in this, and I am so sick and tired of you saying otherwise, and when proof to the contrary is brought to you, ignoring it as false, when all you ever do is post biased sources to serve your backwards logic. GAH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted January 21, 2009 Author Share Posted January 21, 2009 Congratulations. You just topped Bush in the biggest line of bull**** I have ever heard. You want to talk about nonsensical religious dogma, you go to the appropriate place for it, which is not here. You want to talk about the facts, then let's talk about the facts. There has been link after link for sources given in this topic that portray a clear and present use of overkill in Israel's "defense". They are murdering Hamas citizens, regardless of whether or not Hamas has put them in a position to be murdered. Both sides in this are WRONG. Israel is no more justified in this, and I am so sick and ****ing tired of you saying otherwise, and when proof to the contrary is brought to you, ignoring it as false, when all you ever do is post biased sources to serve your backwards logic. GAH. source? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrrtoken Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Does the Six Day War ring any bells or Yom Kippur?Yeah, and Israel was loaded with French and American weapons, along with an entire nation of recruits to send in. Israel faces a choice in each situation, and Israel is smaller than the State of Massachusetts, they have nowhere to retreat.They don't need to; they have plenty ofweapons and soldiers to send out to do their bidding, even if it means going into a scrap of land, kill several hundred, and then get out. My point is, the Israelis are using excessive force against relatively minor attacks. Show me the burn victims, seriously, there are other chemicals that can create air bursts or smoke screens. Furthermore, I've already shown that Reuters used pictures that were photoshopped to add fake smoke in 2006. It isn't that much of a strech to assume the same situation now only in video.Oh. Okay: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5549100.ece http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/833585-overview http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/21/gaza-phosphorus-israel And here is the choice the Israelis face, let them continue shooting rockets and pray one of them doesn't hit a family member, a neighbor, a friend, or take the rocket launch site out. That's the situation they're in, this isn't Canada we're talking about here where a bunch of inaccurate rockets are more likely to hit a Moose than a person.Israel's response: Start a massive military incursion, actively bombing heavily populated areas, and using overall excessive force against rockets that have killed only three civilians. You are completely ignoring the fact that Israel is using this petty excuse of rocket attacks that don't do jack for an unofficial genocide. Gaza is now in ruins, with hundreds of innocents killed and thousands wounded. Gaza in now without power or cleans water, which means that disease will spread fast, due to the catalyst: rotting corpses. Since the good majority of the cities are now in ruins, thousands are now homeless. Food is also scarce, which means starvation, and which means that people will get desperate, including acts of violence to save their family. Israel, on the other hand, is living a life of luxury, replenished from the spoils of war. Yet while millions of Israelis are living a relatively normal life, only a few kilometers away humans are in Hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarfieldJL Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 this is one of the most ridiculous arguments in this thread. to suggest that israel would ever need to retreat anywhere shows near complete ignorance of the situation there. I actually know what I'm talking about, its called a range limit on those rockets, you're proposing Israel should just sit there and let rockets rain down on civilians all day. Because they don't have a place they can move the civilians to. @ PastramiX I may not be a doctor but that doesn't look burns unless they are cigarette burns or something like that. That and possibly some wounding to the face by debris... Again where are the burns? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted January 21, 2009 Author Share Posted January 21, 2009 I actually know what I'm talking about, its called a range limit on those rockets, you're proposing Israel should just sit there and let rockets rain down on civilians all day. Because they don't have a place they can move the civilians to.no i'm proposing they dont kill civilians. and you clearly know what you're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarfieldJL Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 no i'm proposing they dont kill civilians. and you clearly know what you're talking about. Actually I do, assuming the rockets have a range of 40 miles, it would be able to hit the Israeli capital of Tel Aviv, based off the map you provided. Combined with Hezbollah in Lebanon whom would also fire rockets with impunity they have nowhere to evacuate civilians to and their rockets supposedly have the longer range.. The fact that Hamas hasn't killed more people isn't from a lack of trying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrrtoken Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 @ PastramiX I may not be a doctor but that doesn't look burns unless they are cigarette burns or something like that. That and possibly some wounding to the face by debris... Again where are the burns? Oh, you know, those little black marks by his eyes; they're completely charred. He's also now completely blind due to the intense heat of the burning phosphorous essentially vaporizing his irises. And the fact that you're playing down civilian injuries is pathetic, at best. That's as bad as saying "He's not injured enough to receive treatment or compensation." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted January 21, 2009 Author Share Posted January 21, 2009 Actually I do, assuming the rockets have a range of 40 miles, it would be able to hit the Israeli capital of Tel Aviv, based off the map you provided. Combined with Hezbollah in Lebanon whom would also fire rockets with impunity they have nowhere to evacuate civilians to and their rockets supposedly have the longer range..hmm yes absolutely nowhere. and it's not like they're given billions of dollars worth of weapons every year to fight against impoverished palestinians with little in the way of weapons or defenses. also have a video http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2009/jan/19/gaza-phosphorus-victim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarfieldJL Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Oh, you know, those little black marks by his eyes; they're completely charred. He's also now completely blind due to the intense heat of the burning phosphorous essentially vaporizing his irises. And the fact that you're playing down civilian injuries is pathetic, at best. That's as bad as saying "He's not injured enough to receive treatment or compensation." http://www.upjf.org/actualiees-upjf/article-13447-145-7-al-dura-shooting-pallycood-production-paul-schneidereit.html Read it, that gives a good reason why I am hesitant to trust the picture at all. The term is Pallywood, I'd recommend you look it up. And the injuries in the video don't look like burns, they do look like he got hit by something, but not phosphorous, I've seen burns before and they didn't look like what would have been sustained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrrtoken Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 http://www.upjf.org/actualiees-upjf/article-13447-145-7-al-dura-shooting-pallycood-production-paul-schneidereit.html Read it, that gives a good reason why I am hesitant to trust the picture at all. The term is Pallywood, I'd recommend you look it up. Okay, so my entire argument stating that thousands of innocent civilians are suffering in unimaginable ways is completely worthless to you? All because of so-called "sensationalist reporting" that is in fact reporting the truth? So, I guess those burn victims were faking it. I suppose there wasn't war in Gaza. I think that the liberal media is lying. I think this is just a dream, and I need to wake up. But I won't. Cause I like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderWiggin Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 http://www.upjf.org/actualiees-upjf/article-13447-145-7-al-dura-shooting-pallycood-production-paul-schneidereit.html Read it, that gives a good reason why I am hesitant to trust the picture at all. The term is Pallywood, I'd recommend you look it up. And the injuries in the video don't look like burns, they do look like he got hit by something, but not phosphorous, I've seen burns before and they didn't look like what would have been sustained. Straight question, requesting a straight answer: What does the (mainstream) media have to do with any of this when jmac has provided you sources that come from the IDF or another Israeli? Or are you just attempting to derail the thread? I'd recommend () you stop that. It's pretty irrelevant to the topic we're trying to peacefully discuss. _EW_ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarfieldJL Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Okay, so my entire argument stating that thousands of innocent civilians are suffering in unimaginable ways is completely worthless to you? All because of so-called "sensationalist reporting" that is in fact reporting the truth? So, I guess those burn victims were faking it. I suppose there wasn't war in Gaza. I think that the liberal media is lying. I think this is just a dream, and I need to wake up. But I won't. Cause I like it. No, I'm saying they have a history of lieing, and I backed it up with evidence. Do I think people have died, yes, is it saddening yes, but I refuse to lay blame on a country for defending itself. There wouldn't be a tenth the Palestinian casualties if Hamas didn't deliberately shoot off rockets from schools when they were in session. Straight question, requesting a straight answer: What does the (mainstream) media have to do with any of this when jmac has provided you sources that come from the IDF or another Israeli? See the earlier article I brought up about that kid being killed in 2000, Israel took responsibility in the beginning and then it turned out that based on evidence it was highly improbable that the kid was hit with Israeli bullets... Oh and it took a court case to bring that information out. Or are you just attempting to derail the thread? I'd recommend () you stop that. It's pretty irrelevant to the topic we're trying to peacefully discuss. I'm not trying to derail the topic, I've posted evidence to support my statements which call into question the veracity of your sources and some also show that Israel tends to take responsibility for stuff whether they actually were or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted January 21, 2009 Author Share Posted January 21, 2009 No, I'm saying they have a history of lieing, and I backed it up with evidence. Do I think people have died, yes, is it saddening yes, but I refuse to lay blame on a country for defending itself. There wouldn't be a tenth the Palestinian casualties if Hamas didn't deliberately shoot off rockets from schools when they were in session. except it's already been proven by every news organization except your beloved blogs that israel broke the ceasefire and therefore cannot be defending itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted January 21, 2009 Author Share Posted January 21, 2009 yes haaretz, b'tselem, and ehud olmert's spokesman are incredibly unreliable. and have a fox news article about the use of white phosphorus by israel. http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2009Jan20/0,4670,MLGazaWhitePhosphorus,00.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrrtoken Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Okay, this is completely irrelevant to the topic, FYI. We're talking about how many civilians are suffering right now, and you're actively denying that, to suit your own ideals. But hey, I suppose ignorance is bliss, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarfieldJL Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Okay, this is completely irrelevant to the topic, FYI. We're talking about how many civilians are suffering right now, and you're actively denying that, to suit your own ideals. But hey, I suppose ignorance is bliss, eh? No, I'm questioning how many people actually died and the accuracy of the reporting. Also the Fox News article said that: All were victims of a single white phosphorus shell dropped on their home, survivors and doctors said. -- Fox News It also says: Israel says it only used the explosive as flares or smoke screens to protect tanks during heavy combat, and does its best to avoid civilian injuries. The international Red Cross said last week that it had no evidence to suggest the incendiary agent was being used improperly or illegally. -- Fox News If anything this story looks like the shell didn't go off when it was supposed to and that the Israelis army was rather upset that it landed where it did. That's a lot different from deliberately targetting civilians like what you're implying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderWiggin Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I'm not trying to derail the topic, I've posted evidence to support my statements which call into question the veracity of your sources and some also show that Israel tends to take responsibility for stuff whether they actually were or not. So now Israel's lying about being at fault? yes haaretz, b'tselem, and ehud olmert's spokesman are incredibly unreliable. and have a fox news article about the use of white phosphorus by israel. http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2009Jan20/0,4670,MLGazaWhitePhosphorus,00.html _EW_ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.