For what it's worth . . . .
Pro-Israel conspiracy theorist reporting on what he's seen with no real expertise? Really?
Surprising, Doug. Even for you.
Story making the rounds on the other side:
Gaza Strip: 'Palestinian Genocide is Permissible' Claims Israeli Writer
You'll notice that, like most Zionists who come uncomfortably close to fascism, the blogger is from New York.
U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
Story making the rounds on the other side:
Gaza Strip: 'Palestinian Genocide is Permissible' Claims Israeli Writer
You'll notice that, like most Zionists who come uncomfortably close to fascism, the blogger is from New York.
U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
HEY!!!!!!!
The best thing Israel can do is just round up ALL the Palestinians and dump them across the border in Syria...let The UN set up refugee camps there...the militant Pallies can go join ISIS and martyr themselves.
let the Syrian factions deal with these people.
Hamas was elected by the Palestinians so they are responsible for Hamas' actions for good or bad.
I like the other article on that website wherein the author relates how he was scammed out of $40,000 because he suffers from a variety of mental disorders and is gullible.For what it's worth . . . .
But it was considerably more fun to read than other stuff posted.
For what it's worth . . . .
Pro-Israel conspiracy theorist reporting on what he's seen with no real expertise? Really?
Surprising, Doug. Even for you.
Hey, if you don't want to keep an open mind about stuff, I can't force the issue.
Curious that similar photos appeared 2 weeks ago.
Even conspiracy theorists can get it right once in a while.
Hey, if you don't want to keep an open mind about stuff, I can't force the issue.
Stop using a passive aggressive insult as an argument.
Yes. That is exactly what you're doing.
Hey, if you don't want to keep an open mind about stuff, I can't force the issue.Stop using a passive aggressive insult as an argument.
Yes. That is exactly what you're doing.
So I should only link sites that are BigNorseWolf approved?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So I should only link sites that are BigNorseWolf approved?Hey, if you don't want to keep an open mind about stuff, I can't force the issue.Stop using a passive aggressive insult as an argument.
Yes. That is exactly what you're doing.
Stop evading the argument by putting words people didn't say in their mouth.
If you link something that is malarkey, accept the possibility that people rejecting that malarkey is because its malarkey, not because they are closed minded.
If that's the only type of support you can find for your position, reconsider your position rather than crying that the audience is unfair.
Stop evading the argument by putting words people didn't say in their mouth.
If you link something that is malarkey, accept the possibility that people rejecting that malarkey is because its malarkey, not because they are closed minded.
If that's the only type of support you can find for your position, reconsider your position rather than crying that the audience is unfair.
Might be malarkey. Or it might be true. I noticed no one actually pointed out where the guy was wrong.
I wouldn't mind if people only linked to sites that I approved of.
Mass action needed to stop bloodshed
Shahar Benhorin, Socialist Struggle Movement (CWI in Israel-Palestine)
Might be malarkey. Or it might be true. I noticed no one actually pointed out where the guy was wrong.
An epic level ranger could not track this guys thought process, or how anything in the video relates to anything he's saying.
Listen to the narrator at :30 in the video. You can see with your own eyes that this isn’t a crowded or busy market, nor were there 160 wounded.
No. You can't. You can't see the market from this video. You can see ambulances pulling up with people telling the emt's "this way this way" but not what they're being led to, which I think is behind the graffiti'd wall. You can also see a big plume of smoke off in the distance, which is why this guy broke out the camera in the first place. For all I (or this guy) know THATS the market bombing.
Yes, the video shows a bomb going off in an empty parking lot, but what, pray tell, were those people flagging the ambulance down for ?
This video shows an attack on a relatively open space does not mean that all of the other bombs hit a relatively open space.
Might be malarkey. Or it might be true. I noticed no one actually pointed out where the guy was wrong.
Report: 15 Killed in Shijaiyah Market
Apparently, the Security Council of Israel met about it yesterday. I'd rather wait and see what the Israeli claims are before digging through a post by a guy who claims he spent all of last year out of his right mind.
Anything juicy over at Prison Planet or FrontPage?
This video shows an attack on a relatively open space does not mean that all of the other bombs hit a relatively open space.
Um . . . you do know that precision bombing means multiple bombs don't need to be used, right?
Go look at the video in the link, not the video on his site.
This video shows an attack on a relatively open space does not mean that all of the other bombs hit a relatively open space.
Um . . . you do know that precision bombing means multiple bombs don't need to be used, right?
I have NO idea what you're trying to say here. Are you trying to say that there were not multiple bombs?
Multiple bombs were used. There was the big plume of smoke the guy was filming, there was the one that went off while he was filming, and I'm pretty sure there was another one nearby that the crowd was leading the ambulance to.
"the link" is less than informative. He has enough links to different things to tie the girlscouts to global warming.
I have NO idea what you're trying to say here. Are you trying to say that there were not multiple bombs?
Multiple bombs were used. There was the big plume of smoke the guy was filming, there was the one that went off while he was filming, and I'm pretty sure there was another one nearby that the crowd was leading the ambulance to.
"the link" is less than informative. He has enough links to different things to tie the girlscouts to global warming.
Secondary explosions . . . from Hamas' rockets. Bombs explode differently.
You don't like the link. I get that. Next time I'll try and find one that meets your criteria.
How about this one: http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=37&x_article=2 786
I'm sure it's just coincidence. Nothing to see here. Move along.
So you're trying to say that the video shows that they were hamas rockets, or bombs, NOT israeli shells ? And he thinks he can tell that from the video. The guy couldn't even figure out where the market was.
The guy sounds like a 9 11 "truther"
How about this one: http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=37&x_article=2 786
What are you trying to say? You are making random conspiracy statements and expecting me to refute the crazy without knowing which thought process it is.
Articulate your specific claim. Are you trying to say "the rockets are hitting people of this age group, therefore they're mostly hitting terroritsts? "
It looks just like the population of the rest of gaza If there are slightly more males thats no surprise: they're more likely to be demonstrating or staying in high risk areas. If the shelters only have room for so many people, the women and children go and the men stay at home.
Kinda hard to build shelters when Hamas keeps diverting the concrete to build tunnels into Israel.
Kinda hard to build shelters when Hamas keeps diverting the concrete to build tunnels into Israel.
You can't substantiate your claims.
You need to blame everyone for the problem with the argument your sources are making.
When someone calls you on the dissonance between the claims and the evidence, you can't back up the connection, you hop to something completely different and unrelated.
Its not people's bias leading to the conclusions you don't like here. Either you're making really, really horrible arguments for your position or reality's well known liberal bias is showing again.
A spike in the conscript/military aged that isn't present in Gaza's overall population distribution? 44% of the deaths amongst 10% of the population. A statistician might find that little coincidence rather intriguing.
Furthermore, Palestinian Ministry of Health claims 82% of deaths are civilian. A little research into that shows that in 2009 (Operation Cast Lead), 82% of the deaths were claimed to be civilian. Is that coincidence #2?
Luckily, reports indicate the populace of Gaza is starting to turn against Hamas. Some people are probably wondering why that might be. Those of us who follow such things already know why.
You can't substantiate your claims.
Or you won't look further than the propaganda Hamas supplies.
You need to blame everyone for the problem with the argument your sources are making.
I haven't blamed everyone.
When someone calls you on the dissonance between the claims and the evidence, you can't back up the connection, you hop to something completely different and unrelated.
Or maybe I realize I could post a link to a video from Hamas that states everything clearly, and some would argue that it's simply Israeli propaganda.
Its not people's bias leading to the conclusions you don't like here. Either you're making really, really horrible arguments for your position or reality's well known liberal bias is showing again.
What liberal bias would that be? That jihadis like to kill civilians? Liberals seem to think that Hamas is a purely humanitarian group that gives children puppies while making sure their people are safe from the Jews. That Israel, the only functional democracy in the area, has a right and duty to defend itself from murderous thugs who hide behind women and children? Because the "liberal bias" seems to indicate that Hamas is not filled with murderous thugs that set up shop in hospitals and store rockets in schools run by the UN. Maybe that Hamas is a theocratic and demonstrably racist group who's stated goal is to destroy Israel? Certainly, the "liberal bias" demonstrated so far is that Israel is to blame for everything and poor Hamas is just acting the only way it can when it tries to blow up civilians.
I've seen lots of liberal bias, but reality doesn't seem to support it.
Or you won't look further than the propaganda Hamas supplies.
Would you please point to one thing I've cited that is courtesy of hamas? One thing that is factually incorrect
That website and video were horrible on their own merits. The malarky was obvious just from watching the video and what he "interpreted" from it. No other propaganda was necessary. It was making claims that were not supported by what was shown. I pointed that out, you make ad homs without answering it.
I haven't blamed everyone.
you won't look further than the propaganda Hamas supplies
Those of us who follow such things already know why (the implication being that anyone that disagrees with you isn't following things)Hey, if you don't want to keep an open mind about stuff, I can't force the issue.(calling people close minded)
You have an angry, rhetorical , passive aggressive rant that meets resistance with ad homs, NOT an argument.
What liberal bias would that be?
That Hamas cannot solve the situation.
That the situation is almost entirely Israels fault.
The Israel's retribution for the rocket attacks is a massive over reaction
That Israel is the one killing the majority of the civilians (around 800 at last count, compared to Hamas's 2) Israel not shooting back would eliminate over 99% of the innocent deaths.
Liberals seem to think that Hamas is a purely humanitarian group that gives children puppies while making sure their people are safe from the Jews. That Israel, the only functional democracy in the area, has a right and duty to defend itself from murderous thugs who hide behind women and children?
And you wonder why most people here can't take you seriously...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Doug, tough cookies. You want to be taken seriously? Don't start off with a conspiracy theorist who very clearly leans towards one side. I take the goblin seriously even though we agree on little, and that's because he posts stuff from reputable sources more often than not in between his weird commie chants and accusations that dogs and horses are trying to take over the world. You want the same, start finding better sources. Also? Dropping the gve rhetoric might help. Even lord snow points out where Israel had erred, and he is a proud Israeli.
Down with horses and dogs!
I was gonna link it before, but I thought it would be self-indulgent. But now that Citizen Workshop has brought up CAMERA...
United Steel Workers 8751 – A Bus Drivers Union That Supports People Who Blow Up Buses
That sounds like a supremely bad idea.
Somehow I don' think the Palestinians will be happy with knowing that their jailors are feeding them.
|
I'm sorry to disagree with you here, Lord Snow- Britain holds responsibility for a lot of this. If not Britain, then generic old white guys drawing maps and proclaiming this land is their land, that land is the other's, etc.
I don't think jews popped an alchemic tincture and went all cannibal invader on the Palestinians.
That the Palestinians were operating under pressures, both internal and external, is obvious. However, "I had a really hard day at work and was pissed off" is a very poor line in defense when you stand trial for the murder of your wife - you still did the act yourself, and you are to blame, not your boss. Similarly, the Palestinians are to blame for their acts of aggression against the Jewish settlers of the time, not the British.
The thing that matters is that the ones doing the actual bloodshed were the Palestinians. So when Krenski described the situation as the Israelis coming to the Palestinian's homes, kicking in the door and massing things up, that was wildly inaccurate. During the initial confrontations between Jews and Arabs in the 20th century, a lot of Palestinian hands were bloodied. The pressure building up between the two people up to 1948 was perfectly mutual, and, to my understanding, the Palestinians were generally more aggressive at that time.
The bottom line is that the political situation in the Western Bank is *very* complex, and attempts like the one Krensky made, to show one side as the bad guy and the other as the good guy that's being victimized, are doomed to fail miserably when confronted with the facts.
And I actually agree in theorycrafting with what you've put up re: the circumstances post WWI contributing heavily to the rise of Nazi Germany. I think that there are many in the history world who would agree that the Treaty of Versailles laid down the fertile ground from which Nazi Germany would grow.
Yet you wouldn't for a moment suggest to absolve the Germans of the lion's share of the responsibility for world war 2, would you?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, Lord Snow, there is a very important difference between the concepts of explanation and excuse. Explanations merely tell us why. Excuses are when those explanations are seen to take away responsibility for someone's actions.
Without the treaty of Versailles, it is quite likely there wouldn't have been a WWII. The treaty is an explanation, but never an excuse.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Depends. If Germany had snagged austria, gobbled up a french provence, and then said "Now, anyone want to talk about that treaty?" they would have been pretty justified.
Yet you wouldn't for a moment suggest to absolve the Germans of the lion's share of the responsibility for world war 2, would you?
Nope - but neither would I absolve the Allies. I'm all for increasing the level of blame rather than absolving parties.
That Hamas cannot solve the situation.
Hamas can stop firing rockets at Israel. That would stop the situation.
That the situation is almost entirely Israels fault.
Hamas launches rockets at Israel . . . and it's Israel's fault. I see.
The Israel's retribution for the rocket attacks is a massive over reaction
Looking around at the world, I don't see other countries allowing outside forces to launch rockets at their civilian populations without reprisal.
Your opinion is that the reprisal is a massive overreaction. Others have the opinion that Israel is holding back. Because a full fledged invasion of Gaza would no doubt lead to lots of Israeli soldiers getting killed, and considerably more damage to Gaza that what has been done.
That Israel is the one killing the majority of the civilians (around 800 at last count, compared to Hamas's 2) Israel not shooting back would eliminate over 99% of the innocent deaths.
First, Hamas doesn't differentiate between civilian and combatant deaths (says so in their charter). Don't know if you knew that or not.
Second, yes, when Hamas launches rockets from civilian areas and Israel has to attack those sites after warning the civilian population to leave, there will be more civilian deaths. Maybe if Hamas allowed those civilians to leave . . . but many times they don't.
Maybe if Hamas spent all that time building shelters with concrete instead of building tunnels there'd be fewer casualties. But Hamas wants the civilian deaths. Their own misfired rockets have landed on Palestinian houses and Hamas has claimed the deaths were the result of an Israeli attack.
Out of curiosity, how many Israelis should be allowed to be killed before Hamas needs to held accountable?
And you wonder why most people here can't take you seriously...
Depending on what group "most people" belong in, I don't see how this is a bad thing.
I mean, if I'd adamant that Sharknado can't happen and "most people" here disagree with me . . . .
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hamas can stop firing rockets at Israel. That would stop the situation.
It would not. This factual error of yours shows your lack of understanding of the situation and undercuts your entire argument. You think hamas is like a standard military or government where it can actually control the actions of its subordinates: that isn't the case.
Hamas stop firing rockets. Hamas cannot stop the rockets from being fired. Not understanding that difference undercuts your entire argument. If hamas stops firing someone else will start firing.
This recent flare up is a perfect example of what happens. Non hamas individuals kidnapped and killed 3 Israelis. Israel blames Hamas, starts goes into the Palestinian areas and starts arresting people. Hamas fires, Israel fires.
You wouldn't let mexico cross the border to grab US citizens without shooting back either.
You want to hold hamas responsible for the killings when they have no power to stop it. Hamas doesn't like to admit it, but there is no way in hell hamas could stop 2 million really pissed of people from doing things to people living among them even if they were so inclined.
Hamas cannot make everyone behave long enough for Israel to do something about the Palestinian situation. If everything is quiet, the Israeli's don't want to do anything. If they're lobbing rockets, Israel is in the mood to send missiles back.
Hamas launches rockets at Israel . . . and it's Israel's fault. I see.
You don't see. You're too busy being pithy to listen.
You can arbitrarily cut off the cycle of violence and pretend that hamas is always the aggressor. Oh right, israel is only firing in return for the rockets... but that's disingenuous. The rockets are a reprisal for an arrest. The arrest is revenge for a kidnaping. The kidnaping is a revenge for an arrest, the rest is a revenge for...
Underneath the endlessly revolving door of paybacks and reprisals Israel keeps these people virtually imprisoned and deprives them of anything they'd need to have something remotely resembling an economy or a life. That constant, continuous, malfeasance is what differentiates an otherwise homogenous blur
Your opinion is that the reprisal is a massive overreaction. Others have the opinion that Israel is holding back.
The golden mean fallacy again. I'm a good guy because i could have killed 2 million civilians and i only got a thousand.
Second, yes, when Hamas launches rockets from civilian areas and Israel has to attack those sites after warning the civilian population to leave, there will be more civilian deaths. Maybe if Hamas allowed those civilians to leave . . . but many times they don't.
You are saying that hamas forces people to stay somewhere. Can you cite this?
Maybe if Hamas spent all that time building shelters with concrete instead of building tunnels there'd be fewer casualties. But Hamas wants the civilian deaths. Their own misfired rockets have landed on Palestinian houses and Hamas has claimed the deaths were the result of an Israeli attack.
The amount of concrete you need for a tunnel amounts to a mere rounding error on how much you need for a shelter.
On a map, can you point to a non civilian location?
Out of curiosity, how many Israelis should be allowed to be killed before Hamas needs to held accountable?
Any argument to bring hamas up on charges brings the IDF up 10 times over.