Israel’s Nazi Type Actions
Jon°
perfected when attempting to conquer the whole of Europe.
************
“Amnesty's most recent report on Israel claimed its water policies
denied Palestinians an adequate standard of living - including rights
to water, food, health, work and adequate housing”
***********
Such an irony, isn’t it? That Israel should be acting like a Nazi type
state, whilst Zionist Jews, continue to yell “ Nazi Scum” at any that
dare to speak up about Israel’s inhuman acts in "Sunny Palestine".
Of course, one seldom reads anything, such as that shown in the link
below, in the controlled British and Americans press.
**********
Quinquireme of Nineveh from distant Ophir,
Rowing home to a “blockade” in sunny Palestine,
With it’s cargo of food, medicine,
And hope and cheer,
But for the Arab kids of Gaza, all is not fine
Stately Israeli gun boats coming from the Isthmus,
Dipping through the Tropics by the palm-green shores,
With their rockets, machine guns and torpedoes,
Blockading subsidence to Gaza'n families
Who just weep and watch,
They have no protective laws.
(With apologies to the memory of John Masefield)
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1261364477120&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
World has broken faith with the people of Gaza, British NGOs charge
A host of UK charities accused the international community on Tuesday
of "betrayal" for failing to take action to end the Israeli blockade
on Gaza that they claim is "preventing reconstruction and recovery."
Released to coincide with the first "anniversary of the start of
Israel's military offensive in Gaza," the 16 charities and Christian
groups - including Amnesty International, Oxfam, Christian Aid and
Medical Aid for Palestinians - lambasted world powers for not doing
enough and blamed Israel for not allowing Gazans to "rebuild their
shattered lives."
"The people of Gaza have been betrayed by the international community,
which can and must do far more to end this illegal and inhumane
blockade," the 18-page report says.
The groups call on the European Union to put a hold on relations with
Israel until the Jewish state makes progress on human rights and
implementing international law.
"The EU should confirm publicly that the upgrading of relations with
Israel is put on hold, pending tangible progress in Israel's respect
for human rights and international humanitarian law, which should
include its actions with regard to the blockade of Gaza," the report's
authors say.
"It is not only Israel that has failed the people of Gaza with a
blockade that punishes everybody living there for the acts of a few,
world powers have also failed and even betrayed Gaza's ordinary
citizens," says Oxfam's executive director Jeremy Hobbs. "They have
wrung hands and issued statements, but have taken little meaningful
action to attempt to change the damaging policy that prevents
reconstruction, personal recovery and economic recuperation."
DVH
"Jon�" <ray...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:d6162ed2-f2a0-44b3...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> Read in the link below how Israel is using techniques that the Nazi�s
> perfected when attempting to conquer the whole of Europe.
> ************
> �Amnesty's most recent report on Israel claimed its water policies
> denied Palestinians an adequate standard of living - including rights
> to water, food, health, work and adequate housing�
And you still swallow everything Amnesty tell you?
PA incompetence is part of the problem. They don't know where the water
goes, they don't collect 50% of bills, they're inefficient, and lack of
maintenance means that serviceable plants are steadily reducing output.
And of course the PA is famously venal.
Another problem is reliance on aid, which removes the incentive to actually
do anything.
Christopher Helms
> Read in the link below how Israel is using techniques that the Nazi’s
> perfected when attempting to conquer the whole of Europe.
> ************
> “Amnesty's most recent report on Israel claimed its water policies
> denied Palestinians an adequate standard of living - including rights
> to water, food, health, work and adequate housing”
>
> ***********
>
> Such an irony, isn’t it? That Israel should be acting like a Nazi type
> state, whilst Zionist Jews, continue to yell “ Nazi Scum” at any that
> dare to speak up about Israel’s inhuman acts in "Sunny Palestine".
It's not that big a surprise. Given enough time, governments always
become shining examples of what they hate the most, or of what they
were originally founded as a response to. Including ours. Look at all
the stuff the British were doing to the colonists that made them
revolt. It was nothing compared to what our own government does to us
every day but we think we're free because we get to vote for something
like 0.000001% of the government every couple years. It's all a very
sad, disgusting business. There's nothing special about the Israelis
acting like assholes. In fact, there's really nothing special about
Israel at all.
William Black
************
> �Amnesty's most recent report
Now there's a turn up, Amnesty doesn't like Israel...
Not news son.
--
William Black
"Any number under six"
The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat
single handed with a quarterstaff.
White Spirit
> Jon� wrote:
************
>> �Amnesty's most recent report
> Now there's a turn up, Amnesty doesn't like Israel...
> Not news son.
Amnesty doesn't like anyone. I don't think that they single out Israel
in particular.
I'd like to know how we're supposed to know that the tear-jerking
pictures of people banged up inside prisons aren't guilty of horrific
crimes? It's run like a business and their business is to criticise
anyone they can in order to raise 'awareness'.
William Black
Any charity that has people on wages just to raise money is suspect.
Eunometic
> Read in the link below how Israel is using techniques that the Nazi’s
> perfected when attempting to conquer the whole of Europe.
> ************
Here are some maps of the extent of Israel's land grab:
http://www.vdare.com/roberts/091213_kristallnacht.htm
Many other articles by same author.
Eunometic
> "Jon°" <rays...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
Like the $5.8 billion dollars (they like to pretend it is half that)
that the Israel lobby leeches out of the American tax payer should
mean Israel is now at the point of collapse.
William Black
>>
>> news:d6162ed2-f2a0-44b3...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> Read in the link below how Israel is using techniques that the Nazi�s
>>> perfected when attempting to conquer the whole of Europe.
>>> ************
>>> denied Palestinians an adequate standard of living - including rights
>> And you still swallow everything Amnesty tell you?
>>
>> PA incompetence is part of the problem. They don't know where the water
>> goes, they don't collect 50% of bills, they're inefficient, and lack of
>> maintenance means that serviceable plants are steadily reducing output.
>>
>> And of course the PA is famously venal.
>>
>> Another problem is reliance on aid, which removes the incentive to actually
>> do anything.
>
> Like the $5.8 billion dollars (they like to pretend it is half that)
> that the Israel lobby leeches out of the American tax payer should
> mean Israel is now at the point of collapse.
Well Israel doesn't seem to steal any of it, they get receipts...
The bulk of the money is spent with US companies...
cornholio
I notice you don't have much to say about the billions MORE dollars
that
go to support your islamopig brethren in:
Pigistan,
Egypt,
Iraq
Why is that I wonder?
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
> On Dec 23, 7:38 pm, Some Nazi Wanker <ray...@yahoo.co.uk> Snivelled:
>> Read in the link below how Israel is using techniques that the Nazi?s
>> perfected when attempting to conquer the whole of Europe.
>> ************
> Here are some maps of the extent of Israel's land grab:
<http://snappedshot.com/uploads/Parody/jewish_occupation.gif>
Y.
--
Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein
AADP's 'left-wing Israeli intellectual'
'I love California. I practically grew up in Phoenix'
(Dan Quayle)
<http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/>
B J Foster
>>
>> news:d6162ed2-f2a0-44b3...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> Read in the link below how Israel is using techniques that the Nazi�s
>>> perfected when attempting to conquer the whole of Europe.
>>> ************
>>> denied Palestinians an adequate standard of living - including rights
>> And you still swallow everything Amnesty tell you?
>>
>> PA incompetence is part of the problem. They don't know where the water
>> goes, they don't collect 50% of bills, they're inefficient, and lack of
>> maintenance means that serviceable plants are steadily reducing output.
>>
>> And of course the PA is famously venal.
>>
>> Another problem is reliance on aid, which removes the incentive to actually
>> do anything.
>
> Like the $5.8 billion dollars (they like to pretend it is half that)
> that the Israel lobby leeches out of the American tax payer should
> mean Israel is now at the point of collapse.
Less than 1% of their total 'defence' budget spent on the front line?
I think not.
90% of it comes straight back in arms purchases anyway.
Greatest Mining Pioneer of Australia of all Times
wrote:
>
*> Often at dinner parties I often break out and admit that I'm a
racist. Other
*> guests at first nearly choke on their dinner that I could be so
politically
*> incorrect and say such a thing.
*>
*> But then one of the guests will agree with me. By the end of the
meal
*> they've all come over to my side and all eventually admit they just
friggin'
*> hate the massive flow of immigrants into Australia.
*>
*> Australians (even new immigrants) are generally racist and don't
want to see
*> anymore pests enter Australia.
*>
*> Warren Smith
*> Maitland NSW
*> warren.sm...@aussiemail.com.au
You should look into something clearly, this is the circumcised which
are causing problems since Circumcision is a Genetic Mutation.
Something of course ignored by those Universities Imbeciles &
professing parasites Medics, including of course the Endocrinologists
patented Cretins .
The 3 races who mutilate their children and create then the specific
Traits of those genus are the Jews, the Islamists & the Negroes. It
works the other way indeed, Circumcision of the 1st day of the 1st
puberty ( lasting 21 days) creates the Jew, Half hazard circumcision
up to the 2nd puberty in the Islamists ' baby boy create again the
Islamist. Mutilating both the male & female creates the Negroes !
Please note in the Jews & Islamists how the traits are very
stereotyped while in the female they are infinite, like in the other
non-endocrine mutilated races such a Aryan & Celts. Please note as
well how the Jews & Islamist male are darker in completion than their
females, since this is due to one consequence of that Sacrilege
against the True God 's creation, which is a Hyper Pituitary syndrome
with its expanded lobes producing Melanine ( colouring the skin dark)
Note as well in most Jews the Hyper Thyroid syndrome producing as one
of the consequence the popping eye specific trait ( goitre hyper
ophtalmic )
If you are interested in Races, which is your inalienable right, you
should look into what is the real cause of Race shift from an original
indeed Human genome... Further, Mao Tse Tung forbade under pain of
death in 1949 the sexual mutilation of little Chinese girls called
excision. ( in fact excision render the male descent of such later
grown female completely feminine with lack of moral virtues, akin to
what is observed in Eunuchs. 20 years later China stirred itself from
its millennium slumber ! Okay ?
Any normal society cannot assimilate Jews, Islamists or Negroes ...
they take over and ruin it since the Circumcsion turn them into
parasites of such society .... The Jews have the Kosher system which
in party compensates since the basis of it ( the 2nd pillar of the
Jews genetic Manipulation) is to prevent through blood intake
containing hormones indeed, such endocrine signal from tempering with
the modified Genome. There is nothing else in Jews & Islam & Negroes
races, just an abominable genetic manipulation which since it is
openly mentioned does not draw the single suspicion as to what is its
aim : Eugenism & the construction of a Chosen Race to rule Humanity.
Of course the Samaritan Jews aka Islamists have as usual completely
blurred the issue making their whole new sect as a childish, ritual
centered and life hating congregation of blood thirsty parasite
( living on Oil now) ... as for the Negroes the aim of mutilation of
both Male & Female was to turn such into Slaves ( I won't go into the
historic of who did it & when )
The real problem is not there in fact, it is that the so-called White
Races aka Celts, Aryans, Arabs, Chinese, Japanese etc are turned into
Slaves as well through their propensity to put their teeth in blood
oozing animal flesh. Through the signals of the hormones in the blood
of the dead animals such brave races are turned into Cows, Cowards,
Pigs, Chicken ... Okay !!! ... just like you in Australia now, where
only Frauds, Liars, Thieves & Criminals are "honoured" and
celebrated.
Note
Just regarding dinner parties, I was never invited to one of those
during my 10 1/2 years in your Hell on Earth...the 'Frog' epithet
strickly befalling French people, unfortunately unaware of such
stigmate & having landed landed in your precious australiA, made
wonder relative to all the good French people I succefully prevented
going to your Hell on Earth,once I, at least, pulled clear of it. I
dare say that your repute has span the years, and you being so injust
to most worthy people who took the gamble of going to your place, your
rightly get Islamists & Negroes now who will obiously swamp & ruin
your country since they breed like rats, as this is the case in Africa
& Arab states when you pull the Oil out of the latest 's
equation.
So my good Warren Smith, the ball is in your camp, and you in
Australia cannot blame but yourself to be unable to respond, since
being overfed, over-poisoned by vaccine pushers/ criminals & their
Squalene, Mercury etc shots What do you do from that point in time
since now, you know !!! ... and you know as well or at least suspect
it, that the role of that other Jews sect of Christianity is to turn
you into bleating sheep, to prevent to judge & direct you to love
those very enemies who one day will cut the throats of your sons &
daughters TO LOVE INDEED THOSE TRAITORS AT THE HEAD OF AUSTRALIA WHO
LIKE HOWARD DID NOT HESITATE TO MASS MURDER A GOOD 100 AT PORT
ARTHUR ... just like in the Prophecies of Marie-Julie Jahenny, The
Celtic Saint, she said a good 100 years ago that LES ANGLAIS SERONT
TRAHIS PAR UNE REINE (The British will be betrayed by a Queen)
Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
Australia Mining Pioneer
Discoverer & Legal Owner of Telfer Mine (Australia largest Copper &
Gold Mine)
Nifty (Cu) & Kintyre (U, Th) Mines, all in the Great Sandy Desert
Exploration Geologist & Offshore Consultant
Founder of the True Geology
~ Ignorance is the Cosmic Sin, the One Never Forgiven ~
for background info.
http://www.tnet.com.au/~warrigal/grule.html
http://users.indigo.net.au/don/tel/index.html
http://users.indigo.net.au/don/tel/nac.html
http://members.iimetro.com.au/~hubbca/turcaud.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/bbing/stories/s28534.htm
"True Geology" Foundation Document
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/69327
"Turcaud Bath" as a free gift to Suffering Humanity
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/107947
Peter Webb
Unfair water allotments are "Nazi type actions" ?
When did the Nazis create unfair water allotments, exactly?
And if this is the mark of Nazism, I suppose Australia is also a Nazi State,
because we also have unfair water allotments?
What a crock of shit.
Learn to make your point without ridiculous and unwarranted comparisons,
even if they do allow you to use the words "Israel" and "Nazism" in the same
sentence. As it is, you are highlighting your own prejudices, not the
actions of Israel.
Or, to put it in terms you understand, you are a fuckwit.
HTH
DM
<webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> Unfair water allotments are "Nazi type actions" ?
>
> When did the Nazis create unfair water allotments, exactly?
The original Nazis favoured one set of rules for their chosen race and
another for the
untermenschen. Unfair allocation of resources is characteristic of
Nazism. Perhaps you don't remember the difference in condition between
the guards and surrounding civilians and the unfortunate concentration
camp inmates at the end of WW2.
Face it Peter, the Israelis are into some pretty bad stuff at present.
Just because their ancestors were subjected to appalling treatment is
no reason to turn a blind eye when they do it today.
DM
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
Nazism and 'fuckwittism' go hand in hand, really. Take the example cited
here often enough, that of 'illegal' (sic) 'settlements' (sic). The only
fly in that particular pile of steaming shit, is that there are in fact
more illegal homes built by 'Palestinians' (sic) in Judea and Samaria (what
bigoted pigshit call 'the West Bank'), than by Jews.
S'funny how we never hear of them, eh? S'funny how 'respect for the law'
is a criterion applied to Jews only, innit?
Peter Webb
"DM" <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote in message
news:4f32b0e2-4e94-4661...@k32g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 24, 2:43 pm, "Peter Webb"
<webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> Unfair water allotments are "Nazi type actions" ?
>
> When did the Nazis create unfair water allotments, exactly?
The original Nazis favoured one set of rules for their chosen race and
another for the
untermenschen. Unfair allocation of resources is characteristic of
Nazism.
_______________________________
No its not. Unfair allocation of resources happens all the time in all
societies, it is not specifically associated with Nazism.
Things which are characteristic of Nazism include ant-semitism and
shovelling people into gas chambers. If you look up Nazism in a dictionary,
you won't see unfair allocation of water resources listed as a
characteristic. If you think I'm wrong, try for yourself.
Perhaps you don't remember the difference in condition between
the guards and surrounding civilians and the unfortunate concentration
camp inmates at the end of WW2.
______________________________
I do. It did not include unfair water allotments.
Face it Peter, the Israelis are into some pretty bad stuff at present.
Just because their ancestors were subjected to appalling treatment is
no reason to turn a blind eye when they do it today.
__________________________________
So, why not find a reference which says that one of the characteristics of
Nazism is unfair water allocations.
DM
_______________________________
You are a fucking brain-dead crank if you think that unfair agricultural
water allotments were a characteristic of Nazism. They weren't.
Lots of Nazis had initials DM, therefore it was a characteristic of Nazis,
therefore you a Nazi. Makes about as much sense as your stupid allegation,
ie none, but anti-semite cranks are not generally known for there
brain-power (at least not in a nice way).
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
> On Dec 24, 2:43 pm, "Peter Webb"
><webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
>> Unfair water allotments are "Nazi type actions" ?
>>
>> When did the Nazis create unfair water allotments, exactly?
> The original Nazis favoured one set of rules for their chosen race and
> another for the untermenschen. Unfair allocation of resources is
> characteristic of
every country on earth.
You fuckin' retarded mongol.
DM
You tend to get a bit emotional when people criticise Israel Peter. No
person, society or country is above criticism.
The Nazis allocated scarce resources on the basis of ethnicity. Jews
were allocated so little food they starved to death in the midst of a
population that was adequately fed. The Nazis used resource allocation
as a weapon of genocide. They also confiscated the land and business
assets of people other than their "master race", and made it
impossible for them to earn a living.
If you really want a nasty example of Nazis and water, the Dachau sea
water experiments should get you excited. 90 concentration camp
inmates were given nothing but sea water to drink. Some were observed
licking freshly mopped floors in an attempt to obtain drinkable water.
DM
Lou Ravi
> White Spirit wrote:
>> William Black wrote:
>>
>> ************
>>>> �Amnesty's most recent report
>>
>>> Now there's a turn up, Amnesty doesn't like Israel...
>>
>>> Not news son.
>>
>> Amnesty doesn't like anyone. I don't think that they single out
>> Israel in particular.
>>
>> I'd like to know how we're supposed to know that the tear-jerking
>> pictures of people banged up inside prisons aren't guilty of horrific
>> crimes? It's run like a business and their business is to criticise
>> anyone they can in order to raise 'awareness'.
>
> Any charity that has people on wages just to raise money is suspect.
Oh come on William, on that criterion you are excluding most of them.
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
{ snip neo-fascist shite already destroyed by others }
Just to tell you, 'Jon°': you're a fucking imbecile.
Peter Webb
_____________________
I tend to get emotional when anybody criticises any country unfairly.
The Nazis allocated scarce resources on the basis of ethnicity. Jews
were allocated so little food they starved to death in the midst of a
population that was adequately fed. The Nazis used resource allocation
as a weapon of genocide. They also confiscated the land and business
assets of people other than their "master race", and made it
impossible for them to earn a living.
______________________
No mention of water allotments. No mention of this being a particularly Nazi
charactersitic, and hence no justification for the word "Nazi", except that
it allowed you to use both words in the same sentence.
If you really want a nasty example of Nazis and water, the Dachau sea
water experiments should get you excited. 90 concentration camp
inmates were given nothing but sea water to drink. Some were observed
licking freshly mopped floors in an attempt to obtain drinkable water.
________________________
Yep. Nazis did terrible things.
DM
__________________________
Many feel that QLD (here in Australia) gets an unfair water allotment out of
the Darling River. Yet I don't here you comparing the state of QLD with Nazi
Germany, or for that matter saying Israelis are no better than people from
QLD. The reason you don't do this things is because it doesn't allow you to
use the words "Nazi" and "Israel" in the same subject field.
As I have previously stated, unfair water allotments were not a
characteristic of Nazi Germany, there is no validity whatsoever to your
comparison. You made a completely unfair and bogus comparison because you
are an anti-semite crank, and hence have no regard for the truth.
Unless of course you have found a definition of "Nazism" that lists unfair
water allocations as one of its defining characteristics.
An anti-semite, and dumb to boot - not that this is unusual, most
anti-semite cranks are stupid as well, don't think you are particularly
special.
DM
> Many feel that QLD (here in Australia) gets an unfair water allotment out of
> the Darling River. Yet I don't here you comparing the state of QLD with Nazi
> Germany, or for that matter saying Israelis are no better than people from
> QLD. The reason you don't do this things is because it doesn't allow you to
> use the words "Nazi" and "Israel" in the same subject field.
I'm afraid your emotional connection is clouding your judgement Peter.
You appear ridiculous, lashing out the way you are.
If Queensland began allocating scarce resources on the basis of
ethnicity I might start making comparisons with Nazism. I understand
Israel does discriminate in this way, so comparisons are inevitable,
especially when the history is taken into account.
> An anti-semite, and dumb to boot - not that this is unusual, most
> anti-semite cranks are stupid as well, don't think you are particularly
> special.
ROTFLOL!
Wake up and look at yourself Peter.
Accusing me of anti-semitism? Half the net accuses me of being a Jew
FFS!
Israel has done some pretty nasty things in recent years. (the
phosphorus attack on the UN is an example of such) Pretending they
haven't done nasty things makes you appear irrational.
It is possible the nasty things Israel has done can be explained and
justified. It is also possible the nation is suffering a lapse in
morality that deserves condemnation. Currently I believe the latter.
DM
Peter Webb
On Dec 25, 10:46 am, "Peter Webb"
<webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> "DM" <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote in message
> Many feel that QLD (here in Australia) gets an unfair water allotment out
> of
> the Darling River. Yet I don't here you comparing the state of QLD with
> Nazi
> Germany, or for that matter saying Israelis are no better than people from
> QLD. The reason you don't do this things is because it doesn't allow you
> to
> use the words "Nazi" and "Israel" in the same subject field.
I'm afraid your emotional connection is clouding your judgement Peter.
You appear ridiculous, lashing out the way you are.
If Queensland began allocating scarce resources on the basis of
ethnicity I might start making comparisons with Nazism. I understand
Israel does discriminate in this way,
_______________________
Incorrect. Israel does not allocate on the basis of ethnicitiy; water is
alocated according to political boundaries, in much the same manner as is
used betweeb NSW and QLD. So your understanding was wrong, which is (I
guess) one of the reasons your opinions are wrong.
so comparisons are inevitable,
especially when the history is taken into account.
___________________________
No, they aren't inevitable. In this particular case some crank made a
ridiculous suggestion that unfair water allocations are similar to Nazism;
they are not; and I am surprised even you thoughht there was a connection.
> An anti-semite, and dumb to boot - not that this is unusual, most
> anti-semite cranks are stupid as well, don't think you are particularly
> special.
ROTFLOL!
Wake up and look at yourself Peter.
_______________________
I am not an anti-semite.
Accusing me of anti-semitism? Half the net accuses me of being a Jew
FFS!
__________________________
I am not half the net.
Israel has done some pretty nasty things in recent years. (the
phosphorus attack on the UN is an example of such) Pretending they
haven't done nasty things makes you appear irrational.
___________________________
Where did I do that? Or are you hallucinating?
It is possible the nasty things Israel has done can be explained and
justified. It is also possible the nation is suffering a lapse in
morality that deserves condemnation. Currently I believe the latter.
___________________________
Yeah, sure, the West Bank thinks their irrigation allotments are unfair
therefore the Israelis are Nazis. You are a fucking nutjob.
DM
Ariadne
Merry Christmas to all fair-minded people, particularly the friends
and supporters of Israel
Ariadne
> William Black wrote:
> > Jon° wrote:
>
> ************
>
> > Now there's a turn up, Amnesty doesn't like Israel...
> > Not news son.
>
> Amnesty doesn't like anyone. I don't think that they single out Israel
> in particular.
Then you don't think.
Ariadne
> On Dec 23, 7:38 pm, Jon° <rays...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Read in the link below how Israel is using techniques that the Nazi’s
> > perfected when attempting to conquer the whole of Europe.
> > ************
>
> Here are some maps of the extent of Israel's land grab:
Which doesn't exist, Adolf.
Ariadne
Another snotrag of an antisemite,
The gods have made us mad
"Ariadne" <ariad...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d4d4db15-15b9-424f...@h9g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
> Merry Christmas to all fair-minded people, particularly the friends
> and supporters of Israel, grateful thanks to you all for bailing out Jew
> bankers, allowing yourselves to be bound by Jew laws drafted by Jew
> politicians - and, most of all, sending your sons to die in a Jew war.
> You might be goi scum - but we value your usefulness<
cornholio
Yes it would be far better to allow your muslime brethren to slaughter
all the Jews and Christians in Israel wouldn't it Ahmed?
cornholio
It's too bad such people can't be deported en masse, at gunpoint
to their choice of islamopig theocracy, where they would be far
happier.
Uncle Toad
"cornholio" <andx...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ea58dc09-d01c-4aa3...@m25g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
You're secretly an ass lifting Muzzie, right, Doodoo?
Dr. Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF
Why of their choice? Just pick the worst one and send them there.
Now, the only problem is, which is the worst pislamic shithole?
--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ipvdBnU8F8
- KRudd at his finest.
"The Labour Party is corrupt beyond redemption!"
- Labour hasbeen Mark Latham in a moment of honest clarity.
"This is the recession we had to have!"
- Paul Keating explaining why he gave Australia another Labour recession.
"Silly old bugger!"
- Well known ACTU pisspot and sometime Labour prime minister Bob Hawke
responding to a pensioner who dared ask for more.
"By 1990, no child will live in poverty"
- Bob Hawke again, desperate to win another election.
"A billion trees ..."
- Borke, pissed as a newt again.
"Well may we say 'God save the Queen' because nothing will save the governor
general!"
- Egotistical shithead and pompous fuckwit E.G. Whitlam whining about his
appointee for Governor General John Kerr.
"SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU DUMB CUNT!"
- FlangesBum on learning the truth about Labour's economic capabilities.
"I don't care what you fuckers think!"
- KRudd the KRude Rat at his finest again.
"We'll just change it all when we get in."
- Garrett the carrott
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
Hahah .. another Nazi fuck who spits all over his screen as he screams his
hatred of 'The Joos!', and then accuses someone else of being
'emotional'...
> The Nazis allocated scarce resources on the basis of ethnicity. Jews
> were allocated so little food they starved to death in the midst of a
> population that was adequately fed. The Nazis used resource allocation
> as a weapon of genocide. They also confiscated the land and business
> assets of people other than their "master race", and made it
> impossible for them to earn a living.
Yes, they did all of that.
The Israelis don't.
So grow up, you demented fucktard.
> If you really want a nasty example of Nazis and water, the Dachau sea
> water experiments should get you excited. 90 concentration camp
> inmates were given nothing but sea water to drink. Some were observed
> licking freshly mopped floors in an attempt to obtain drinkable water.
Completely irrelevant, as Israel does not allocate resources unfairly to
the 'Palestinians' (sic).
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
> On Dec 25, 10:46 am, "Peter Webb"
><webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
>> Many feel that QLD (here in Australia) gets an unfair water allotment
>> out of the Darling River. Yet I don't here you comparing the state of
>> QLD with Nazi Germany, or for that matter saying Israelis are no better
>> than people from QLD. The reason you don't do this things is because it
>> doesn't allow you to use the words "Nazi" and "Israel" in the same
>> subject field.
> I'm afraid your emotional connection is clouding your judgement Peter.
> You appear ridiculous, lashing out the way you are.
Classic comedy: a Nazi shitface lashes out at Jews, and then calls someone
_else_ 'emotional' when his infantile insults are defeated.
> If Queensland began allocating scarce resources on the basis of ethnicity
> I might start making comparisons with Nazism.
That would probably because you're an imbecile who doesn't know what the
word 'Nazi' means.
> I understand Israel does discriminate in this way,
No you don't 'understand' anything of the sort.
> so comparisons are inevitable,
Only by 'Nazibois' (I quite like that...) like you, who hate Jews.
> especially when the history is taken into account.
>
>> An anti-semite, and dumb to boot - not that this is unusual, most
>> anti-semite cranks are stupid as well, don't think you are particularly
>> special.
>
> ROTFLOL!
> Wake up and look at yourself Peter.
> Accusing me of anti-semitism? Half the net accuses me of being a Jew
> FFS!
'Half the net' could accuse you of being Pope Pius XVI for all I care.
You're still an anti-Semite.
> Israel has done some pretty nasty things in recent years.
All countries do 'nasty things', you retarded sister-shagger.
> (the
> phosphorus attack on the UN is an example of such) Pretending they
> haven't done nasty things makes you appear irrational.
Oh, would that be the 'attack' on a UN shelter that had been used (with, as
it transpires, the full approval of the UN personnel on the ground) to
attack Israeli soldiers? You know, the one that the UN initially denied
had been used that way, only to very, _very_ quietly admit later on that it
had been? The 'attack' which was given front-page news, whilst the
subsequent admission by the UN was tucked away in one paragraph on the
lower-left corner of page 27? Would that be it? Or did you have another
'attack' in mind?
As for 'phosphorus', spare us your crap. It is no way illegal when used as
Tsahal used it. Get a new catchphrase, or else go back to cuddling up to
a life-sized blow-up doll of Göring.
> It is possible the nasty things Israel has done can be explained and
> justified. It is also possible the nation is suffering a lapse in
> morality that deserves condemnation. Currently I believe the latter.
It is also possible - in fact, downright certain - that your IQ hovers
around sixty, and that you kneel over photos of Hitler with your cock in
your hand.
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
{ snip Nazi bile unread }
You not drunk yourself into an early grave yet, Nazi scum?
Eunometic
> Eunometic wrote:
> > On Dec 23, 7:51 pm, "DVH" <d...@vhvhvhvh.com> wrote:
>
> >>news:d6162ed2-f2a0-44b3...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>> Read in the link below how Israel is using techniques that the Nazi’s
> >>> perfected when attempting to conquer the whole of Europe.
> >>> ************
> >>> denied Palestinians an adequate standard of living - including rights
> >> And you still swallow everything Amnesty tell you?
>
> >> PA incompetence is part of the problem. They don't know where the water
> >> goes, they don't collect 50% of bills, they're inefficient, and lack of
> >> maintenance means that serviceable plants are steadily reducing output.
>
> >> And of course the PA is famously venal.
>
> >> Another problem is reliance on aid, which removes the incentive to actually
> >> do anything.
>
> > Like the $5.8 billion dollars (they like to pretend it is half that)
> > that the Israel lobby leeches out of the American tax payer should
> > mean Israel is now at the point of collapse.
>
> Less than 1% of their total 'defence' budget spent on the front line?
> I think not.
>
Wow, it costs the US tax payer nothing.
>
> - Show quoted text -
US$1.8 billion buys 36 x $50 million dollar fighter jets per year.
Or it buys 18 per year and provides for opperation of 100-200.
$5.8 billion provides substantially more.
Israel gets its airforce and all other major equipement for free.
The Germans provided the subs, more or less for free as well.
Eunometic
> Eunometic <eunome...@yahoo.com.au>
>
> Another snotrag of an antisemite,
Lets see what happens if we give the Palestinians 1.8 billion dollars
per year or $1000/per head.
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
William Black
>
> US$1.8 billion buys 36 x $50 million dollar fighter jets per year.
>
They're bloody cheap fighters for these days.
Eurofighter runs out at about $140M and the F-22 something over $400M a
copy...
--
William Black
"Any number under six"
The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat
single handed with a quarterstaff.
B J Foster
> On Dec 25, 10:46 am, "Peter Webb"
> <webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
>> "DM" <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote in message
>
>
> Israel has done some pretty nasty things in recent years. (the
> phosphorus attack on the UN is an example of such) Pretending they
> haven't done nasty things makes you appear irrational.
>
> It is possible the nasty things Israel has done can be explained and
> justified. It is also possible the nation is suffering a lapse in
> morality that deserves condemnation. Currently I believe the latter.
>
> DM
>
Here is one of the original articles claiming:
"Israeli Shells Kill 40 at Gaza U.N. School
...
Israeli mortar shells killed as many as 40 Palestinians, among them
women and children, outside a United Nations school in Gaza on Tuesday
where they were taking refuge in the 11th day of the conflict. The
Israeli military contended that Hamas fighters had fired mortars from
the school compound, and United Nations officials called for an
independent inquiry into the episode"
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/world/middleeast/07mideast.html?_r=2&hp
On January 6, two residents near the school told AP that the IDF had
been fired on from "a street near the school". The IDF released a video
confirming that this had happened before.
Meanwhile, Maxwell Gaylard, the UN humanitarian coordinator for the
Palestinian territories, demanded an investigation, saying that "if
international humanitarian law has been contravened, those responsible
must held accountable".
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1231167272256&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull
Later, he backtracked on the claim and the demand for an investigation
when a teacher AT THE SCHOOL told the Globe and Mail that "Three of my
students were killed, but they were all outside". He HAD BEEN TOLD BY
THE UN NOT TO SPEAK TO THE MEDIA.
Faced with this evidence:
"UN backtracks on claim that deadly IDF strike hit Gaza school
The United Nations has reversed its stance on one of the most
contentious and bloody incidents of the recent Israel Defense Forces
operation in Gaza, saying that an IDF mortar strike that killed 43
people on January 6 did not hit one of the United Nations Relief and
Works Agency schools after all.
It seems that the UN has been under pressure to put the record straight
after doubts arose that the school had actually been targeted.
Gaylord said that the UN 'would like to clarify that the shelling and
all of the fatalities took place *outside* and not inside the school'.
UNRWA, an agency whose sole purpose is to work with Palestinian
refugees, said in response Tuesday that it had maintained from the day
of attack that the wounded were *outside* of the school compound. UNRWA
said that the source of the 'mistake' in recent weeks had originated
with a separate branch of the United Nations.
Senior IDF officials had previously expressed skepticism that the school
had been struck, saying that two mortar shells could not kill 43 people
and wound dozens more".
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1061189.html
Let's go back to the original demand by Gaylord whathisname, shall we?
"if international humanitarian law has been contravened, those
responsible must held accountable".
Hamas chooses to operate from within the civilian population and to use
non-combatants as human shields. It's obvious that the school itself was
used as a shield by Hamas:
"A witness from Jabalya said that he had seen Abu Asker in the area of
the school right before the attack when he answered a call for
volunteers to pile sand around the camp 'to help protect the resistance
fighters'".
No wonder the Israelis scoff at an "independent investigation" by the UN
- the UN has been thoroughly compromised!
So why are Hamas leaders not being arrested for these atrocities?
euno...@yahoo.com.au
> Eunometic wrote:
>
> > US$1.8 billion buys 36 x $50 million dollar fighter jets per year.
>
> They're bloody cheap fighters for these days.
>
> Eurofighter runs out at about $140M and the F-22 something over $400M a
> copy...
>
Israels F-16I costs maybe 45 million. The finest fighter you can buy
and actually get delivered with everything working and built in
(unlike the eurojoke promise) is the F-16E/F and it is about $50
million.
F-22s are not for sale its absurd price reflectiing its miniscule
production run, about 1/4rd of the orginal plan.
F-35 about 83 million.
DM
<yitz...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 2009-12-25, DM <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
still an anti-Semite.
>
> > Israel has done some pretty nasty things in recent years.
>
> All countries do 'nasty things', you retarded sister-shagger.
>
> > (the
> > phosphorus attack on the UN is an example of such) Pretending they
> > haven't done nasty things makes you appear irrational.
>
> Oh, would that be the 'attack' on a UN shelter that had been used (with, as
> it transpires, the full approval of the UN personnel on the ground) to
> attack Israeli soldiers? You know, the one that the UN initially denied
> had been used that way, only to very, _very_ quietly admit later on that it
> had been? The 'attack' which was given front-page news, whilst the
> subsequent admission by the UN was tucked away in one paragraph on the
> lower-left corner of page 27? Would that be it? Or did you have another
> 'attack' in mind?
>
> As for 'phosphorus', spare us your crap. It is no way illegal when used as
> Tsahal used it. Get a new catchphrase, or else go back to cuddling up to
> a life-sized blow-up doll of Göring.
Actually I was referring to an artillery bombardment using white
phosphorous munitions on a UN compound that was occupied by the UN
after the UN commander specifically told the IDF the location was
currently occupied by fuel tankers.
I suppose it is possible the IDF wanted to illuminate the UN compound
to see if the UN commander's information was accurate, or maybe he
wanted to obscure the area with smoke. Those are the only two uses of
phosphorous munitions that are legal under international law.
Personally I can't think of any reason a civilised nation would drop
white phosphorous on a location they knew to be occupied by fuel
tankers and non-combatants. I think attacking the UN with white
phosphorous was a very nasty thing to do.
If something is nasty it doesn't matter who does it.
DM
DM
> DM wrote:
> > On Dec 25, 10:46 am, "Peter Webb"
> > <webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >> "DM" <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > Israel has done some pretty nasty things in recent years. (the
> > phosphorus attack on the UN is an example of such) Pretending they
> > haven't done nasty things makes you appear irrational.
>
> > It is possible the nasty things Israel has done can be explained and
> > justified. It is also possible the nation is suffering a lapse in
> > morality that deserves condemnation. Currently I believe the latter.
>
> > DM
>
> Here is one of the original articles claiming:
> "Israeli Shells Kill 40 at Gaza U.N. School
"The initial examination conducted with forces operating in the area
shows that mortar shells were fired from within the school at IDF
forces. The IDF returned fire," the IDF Spokesman's Office said,
adding, "In the past Hamas has fired at Israeli troops from within the
school, making cynical use of civilians."
Was the IDF spokesman lying?
Incidentaly the IDF leadership is full of shit if it believes 2 mortar
rounds cannot kill 40 people.
Oh, and will you be justifying the phosphorous attack on the UN
compound too?
Perhaps you should hire the ex Iraqi information minister, he seemed
good at putting a positive spin on a hopeless cause.
DM
DM
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=32990&Cr=palestin&Cr1
"...It was the latest of several recent statements by Mr. Ban calling
for a halt to Israeli settlement activity and the demolition of
Palestinian homes and evictions in East Jerusalem."
DM
Peter Webb
On Dec 27, 8:10 pm, "yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)"
<yitz...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 2009-12-25, DM <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
still an anti-Semite.
>
> > Israel has done some pretty nasty things in recent years.
>
> All countries do 'nasty things', you retarded sister-shagger.
>
> > (the
> > phosphorus attack on the UN is an example of such) Pretending they
> > haven't done nasty things makes you appear irrational.
>
> Oh, would that be the 'attack' on a UN shelter that had been used (with,
> as
> it transpires, the full approval of the UN personnel on the ground) to
> attack Israeli soldiers? You know, the one that the UN initially denied
> had been used that way, only to very, _very_ quietly admit later on that
> it
> had been? The 'attack' which was given front-page news, whilst the
> subsequent admission by the UN was tucked away in one paragraph on the
> lower-left corner of page 27? Would that be it? Or did you have another
> 'attack' in mind?
>
> As for 'phosphorus', spare us your crap. It is no way illegal when used as
> Tsahal used it. Get a new catchphrase, or else go back to cuddling up to
Actually I was referring to an artillery bombardment using white
phosphorous munitions on a UN compound that was occupied by the UN
after the UN commander specifically told the IDF the location was
currently occupied by fuel tankers.
I suppose it is possible the IDF wanted to illuminate the UN compound
to see if the UN commander's information was accurate, or maybe he
wanted to obscure the area with smoke. Those are the only two uses of
phosphorous munitions that are legal under international law.
_____________________________
Yes, they had tanks in the area, and there were militants operating from
just outside the UN camp. In narrow streets, tanks are extremely vulnerable
to hand held anti-tank weapons fired from inside buildings, and hence laying
down smoke is standard operating procedure.
This use of white phosphorous is completely legal as you note. As a
technical note, it would be quite legal for Israel to use white phosphorous
in lots of other roles. When you say "international law", these restrictions
on the use of white phosphorous are technically not laws but treaties and
neither Gaza nor Israel are signatories to the relevant treaties (parts of
the Geneva Convention).
Israel voluntarily abides by the Geneva Convention, as it has in this case,
but it is not obligated to do so.
Peter Webb
On Dec 28, 7:42 am, B J Foster <bjfos...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
> DM wrote:
> > On Dec 25, 10:46 am, "Peter Webb"
> > <webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >> "DM" <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > Israel has done some pretty nasty things in recent years. (the
> > phosphorus attack on the UN is an example of such) Pretending they
> > haven't done nasty things makes you appear irrational.
>
> > It is possible the nasty things Israel has done can be explained and
> > justified. It is also possible the nation is suffering a lapse in
> > morality that deserves condemnation. Currently I believe the latter.
>
> > DM
>
> Here is one of the original articles claiming:
> "Israeli Shells Kill 40 at Gaza U.N. School
Here's another quote from elsewhere on the same site yours came from:
"The initial examination conducted with forces operating in the area
shows that mortar shells were fired from within the school at IDF
forces. The IDF returned fire," the IDF Spokesman's Office said,
adding, "In the past Hamas has fired at Israeli troops from within the
school, making cynical use of civilians."
Was the IDF spokesman lying?
__________________________
No.
Hamas use sensitive civilian sites to launch attacks all the time, figuring
they can use the site as a human shield.
DM
<webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> "DM" <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote in message
>
> news:53c3cf2f-5c52-4a38...@a21g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 27, 8:10 pm, "yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)"<yitz...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On 2009-12-25, DM <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>
> still an anti-Semite.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > Israel has done some pretty nasty things in recent years.
>
> > All countries do 'nasty things', you retarded sister-shagger.
>
> > > (the
> > > phosphorus attack on the UN is an example of such) Pretending they
> > > haven't done nasty things makes you appear irrational.
>
> > Oh, would that be the 'attack' on a UN shelter that had been used (with,
> > as
> > it transpires, the full approval of the UN personnel on the ground) to
> > attack Israeli soldiers? You know, the one that the UN initially denied
> > had been used that way, only to very, _very_ quietly admit later on that
> > it
> > had been? The 'attack' which was given front-page news, whilst the
> > subsequent admission by the UN was tucked away in one paragraph on the
> > lower-left corner of page 27? Would that be it? Or did you have another
> > 'attack' in mind?
>
> > As for 'phosphorus', spare us your crap. It is no way illegal when used as
> > Tsahal used it. Get a new catchphrase, or else go back to cuddling up to
>
> Actually I was referring to an artillery bombardment using white
> phosphorous munitions on a UN compound that was occupied by the UN
> after the UN commander specifically told the IDF the location was
> currently occupied by fuel tankers.
>
> I suppose it is possible the IDF wanted to illuminate the UN compound
> to see if the UN commander's information was accurate, or maybe he
> wanted to obscure the area with smoke. Those are the only two uses of
> phosphorous munitions that are legal under international law.
>
> _____________________________
> Yes, they had tanks in the area, and there were militants operating from
> just outside the UN camp. In narrow streets, tanks are extremely vulnerable
> to hand held anti-tank weapons fired from inside buildings, and hence laying
> down smoke is standard operating procedure.
We both know you are talking shit BJ.
Smoke screens are either laid around the tanks themselves, or as a
curtain between the tanks and the enemy. You don't conduct a precision
strike in a group of fuel tankers in a UN compound as a smokescreen.
Also, smoke is not an effective defence for tanks against man portable
weapons in narrow streets. It is meant to obscure tanks from stand-off
weapons in an open situation. In a city the buildings provide better
visual screening than smoke at ground level. Last time I checked the
Palestinians didn't have air capability.
It beggars belief the IDF would try to lay down a smoke screen inside
a corrugated iron warehouse, come to think of it.
The only people who would believe a smoke screen story are those who
need to believe it for ideological reasons.
There is some interesting footage of the aftermath at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wbH03z1plk
DM
>
> This use of white phosphorous is completely legal as you note. As a
> technical note, it would be quite legal for Israel to use white phosphorous
> in lots of other roles. When you say "international law", these restrictions
> on the use of white phosphorous are technically not laws but treaties and
> neither Gaza nor Israel are signatories to the relevant treaties (parts of
> the Geneva Convention).
>
> Israel voluntarily abides by the Geneva Convention, as it has in this case,
> but it is not obligated to do so.
Are you telling me Israel is not a signatory to the Geneva Convention?
I thought all civilised countries had signed and ratified these
conventions.
Do you know why Israel hasn't?
DM
B J Foster
> On Dec 28, 7:42 am, B J Foster <bjfos...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
>> DM wrote:
>>> On Dec 25, 10:46 am, "Peter Webb"
>>> <webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>> "DM" <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> Israel has done some pretty nasty things in recent years. (the
>>> phosphorus attack on the UN is an example of such) Pretending they
>>> haven't done nasty things makes you appear irrational.
>>> It is possible the nasty things Israel has done can be explained and
>>> justified. It is also possible the nation is suffering a lapse in
>>> morality that deserves condemnation. Currently I believe the latter.
>>> DM
>> Here is one of the original articles claiming:
>> "Israeli Shells Kill 40 at Gaza U.N. School
> Here's another quote from elsewhere on the same site yours came from:
>
> "The initial examination conducted with forces operating in the area
> shows that mortar shells were fired from within the school at IDF
> forces. The IDF returned fire," the IDF Spokesman's Office said,
> adding, "In the past Hamas has fired at Israeli troops from within the
> school, making cynical use of civilians."
>
> Was the IDF spokesman lying?
The same site? Did you mean the New York Times?
It was in the same quote!!!
You seem to be quite adept at snipping the bits that destroy your argument.
"Israeli Shells Kill 40 at Gaza U.N. School
...
Israeli mortar shells killed as many as 40 Palestinians, among them
women and children, outside a United Nations school in Gaza on Tuesday
where they were taking refuge in the 11th day of the conflict. The
Israeli military contended that Hamas fighters had fired mortars *from*
*the* *school* *compound*, and United Nations officials called for an
independent inquiry into the episode"
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/07/world/middleeast/07mideast.html?_r=2&hp
(emphasis added to assist comprehension)
>
> Incidentaly the IDF leadership is full of shit if it believes 2 mortar
> rounds cannot kill 40 people.
Incidentally, why was the teacher instructed not to speak to the media?
Maxwell Gaylard (who is based in Jerusalem, not Gaza) retracted his
claim that the school itself was hit *only* *after* the teacher ignored
instructions and opted for the truth.
>
> Oh, and will you be justifying the phosphorous attack on the UN
> compound too?
No, I won't.
I am not here to defend the IDF for every single incident that they are
accused of. I said clearly before that civilised people act according to
the rule of law & that sometimes people in power do the wrong thing or
make mistakes. At the end of the day the Israelis have laws and if they
break them, they can be prosecuted.
You raised an incident & I showed that the accusations were completely &
utterly false. Moreover, the UN official has been completely compromised
- the UN is supposed to be neutral and impartial.
Are you going to raise a succession of incidents and demand
justification for each one?
> Perhaps you should hire the ex Iraqi information minister, he seemed
> good at putting a positive spin on a hopeless cause.
You are completely unbalanced in your judgement. Where is your judgement
of the terrorist atrocities? Fundamentally, Hamas are operating from the
midst of the civilian population in a densely populated area *precisely*
so that civilians will be injured.
You are no fool - you know that, yet you choose to ignore it.
Why is Israel judged with one yardstick and Hamas another? Is this your
own deep-seated bigotry or have you been compromised too?
>
> DM
@invalid.com Uncle Toad
Santa passed by your house again?
Peter Webb
>
> Actually I was referring to an artillery bombardment using white
> phosphorous munitions on a UN compound that was occupied by the UN
> after the UN commander specifically told the IDF the location was
> currently occupied by fuel tankers.
>
> I suppose it is possible the IDF wanted to illuminate the UN compound
> to see if the UN commander's information was accurate, or maybe he
> wanted to obscure the area with smoke. Those are the only two uses of
> phosphorous munitions that are legal under international law.
>
> _____________________________
> Yes, they had tanks in the area, and there were militants operating from
> just outside the UN camp. In narrow streets, tanks are extremely
> vulnerable
> to hand held anti-tank weapons fired from inside buildings, and hence
> laying
> down smoke is standard operating procedure.
We both know you are talking shit BJ.
Smoke screens are either laid around the tanks themselves, or as a
curtain between the tanks and the enemy. You don't conduct a precision
strike in a group of fuel tankers in a UN compound as a smokescreen.
_______________________________
You don't lay precision strikes of smokescreens, they are not a precision
weapon.
But to summarise the "facts":
1. The Israelis claimed that the phospurous was for the purposes of a smoke
screen.
2. This use is permitted under the Geneva convention.
3. In any even, neither Israel or Gaza are signatories.
4. However you cut it, the actions by Israel were completely legal.
5. You now seem to be changing your argument that the IDF don't know how to
conduct tank operations in urban areas. Perhaps you should offer your
services as a consultant to the IDF; they do a lot of operations with tanks
in urban areas and might be able to use your expertise.
B J Foster
> On Dec 28, 5:42 pm, "Peter Webb"
> <webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
>> "DM" <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote in message
>>
>
> We both know you are talking shit BJ.
?????
DM
Are you telling me you don't know you are talking shit?
DM
DM
I actually believe the Israelis do know how to conduct tank operations
in urban areas and that they do know how to create a smoke screen
properly. That leads me to the inescapable conclusion the phosphorous
bombardment was not conducted to create a smoke screen to conceal
tanks. It was conducted for some other reason. Since the bombardment
came down with pinpoint accuracy on a location the IDF knew contained
fuel trucks, I would suggest it was intended to set fire to UN fuel
tankers.
The use of phosphorous as an incendiary is considered abhorrent by
civilised nations, so abhorrent its use for this purpose is outlawed
by international treaty.
So, can you now admit Israel has been doing pretty nasty things
recently, to wit using white phosphorous as an incendiary weapon and
deliberately targeting non-combatants?
If you can't bring yourself to classify these acts as "pretty nasty"
then I', afraid you classify yourself along with the original Nazis on
the inhumanity scale.
Dm
B J Foster
Who are you addressing this to?
Peter Webb
__________________________
Firstly then, your "evidence" is your "opinion" of their motive. Worth jack
shit.
Secondly, why on earth would you think that Israel would want to set fire to
UN trucks using white phosphorous or in any other way? Attacking UN
facilities would just bring them world condemnation, and achieve nothing
militarily. Israel simply has no motive for this, nothing to gain and a huge
amount of world opinion to lose.
The use of phosphorous as an incendiary is considered abhorrent by
civilised nations, so abhorrent its use for this purpose is outlawed
by international treaty.
So, can you now admit Israel has been doing pretty nasty things
recently, to wit using white phosphorous as an incendiary weapon and
deliberately targeting non-combatants?
______________________________
I just don't see a motive for Israel doing that, and the explanation they
have offered (tank smokescreen) is consistent with what else we know.
If you can't bring yourself to classify these acts as "pretty nasty"
then I', afraid you classify yourself along with the original Nazis on
the inhumanity scale.
________________________
I can't see why they would target civilians in a UN compound with white
phosphorous. I can see why they need smokscreens around tanks in urban
areas.
Dm
DM
Open both eyes then.
> I can see why they need smokscreens around tanks in urban
> areas.
Smoke screens are used to obscure tanks from observation at a
distance. Buildings do that in urban areas. There is no need for
smoke.
Tanks make rather a lot of noise. You can tell where they are in a
general sense for tens of kilometres. In an urban area you just walk
toward the noise with your man-portable anti tank weapon. Smoke
doesn't interfere with that in a narrow street urban environment, in
fact it obscures people walking toward your tanks with weapons. If the
tank is surrounded by smoke it can't see people either. White
phosphorous smoke also renders a tank's night vision system
ineffective. Tankies really hate not being able to see what's in their
immediate vicinity. It makes them sitting ducks for the kind of man-
portable anti-tank weapons used by Palestinian militia.
I forgot to mention the Israeli attack on the UN compound using white
phosphorous happened about the same time the UN Secretary General was
arriving in Israel. he received news of the attack as soon as he
arrived. I'd say it was an excellent way of telling him to fuck off
and stop interfering with Israeli affairs.
It wasn't very nice though, won't you agree?
DM
bringyagrogalong
>
> I forgot to mention the Israeli attack on the UN compound using white
> phosphorous happened about the same time the UN Secretary General was
> arriving in Israel. he received news of the attack as soon as he
> arrived. I'd say it was an excellent way of telling him to fuck off
> and stop interfering with Israeli affairs.
>
> It wasn't very nice though, won't you agree?
Indeed!
But the Israelis aren't very nice people...
http://www.uruknet.de/?p=50118
Didn't Hitler make war on children?
-------
Ask not whether I am anti-Semitic -- ask only whether I am right.
- John Bryant
Krudd the Dud
<sof...@aapt.net.au> wrote:
>>
>> It wasn't very nice though, won't you agree?
>
>Indeed!
>
>But the Israelis aren't very nice people...
Are you Israeli, SerGay?
Peter Webb
You still haven't given a reason - a motive - for why Isreal would want to
target UN trucks in a UN compound with white phosphorous. As I said, all
this would do is inflame world opinion against Israel (definitely not in its
interest) without any offsetting benefits at all.
The closest you said was that the UN Secretary General was arriving in
Isreal that day, and they did this as a message to "fuck off". This does not
bear any scrutiny at all. You have provided no reason why they would want to
tell the UN Secretary General to "fuck off". Indeed, if they didn't want him
in their country, they could have simply denied him a visa in the first
place. The same goes for any UN personnel in either Israel or Gaza.
Hitting UN personnel with white phosphorous obviously caused Israel to take
a major hit in world opinion. If this was deliberate, then they must have
expected some benefit of comparable value. I cannot imagine what that is,
and nor have you described what it could be. Sending a message to the UN
Secretary General to fuck-off out of Israel is obviously not it; they could
as easily just suspended his visa or refused to meet with him.
Using WP against UN civilians gains them absolutely nothing at all
militarily; it costs them hugely in other ways; they aren't stupid;
therefore it was not deliberate.
Peter Webb
"bringyagrogalong" <sof...@aapt.net.au> wrote in message
news:4cedd7d2-a87a-4264...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> DM <israeli.apologist...@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>>
>> I forgot to mention the Israeli attack on the UN compound using white
>> phosphorous happened about the same time the UN Secretary General was
>> arriving in Israel. he received news of the attack as soon as he
>> arrived. I'd say it was an excellent way of telling him to fuck off
>> and stop interfering with Israeli affairs.
>>
>> It wasn't very nice though, won't you agree?
>
> Indeed!
>
> But the Israelis aren't very nice people...
>
> http://www.uruknet.de/?p=50118
>
> Didn't Hitler make war on children?
>
Gee. Some photos of dead babies of vaguely Middle Eastern appearance.
Collect this kind of porn then do you?
bringyagrogalong
> "bringyagrogalong" <sof...@aapt.net.au> wrote in message
>
> >> I forgot to mention the Israeli attack on the UN compound using white
> >> phosphorous happened about the same time the UN Secretary General was
> >> arriving in Israel. he received news of the attack as soon as he
> >> arrived. I'd say it was an excellent way of telling him to fuck off
> >> and stop interfering with Israeli affairs.
>
> >> It wasn't very nice though, won't you agree?
>
> > Indeed!
>
> > But the Israelis aren't very nice people...
>
> > http://www.uruknet.de/?p=50118
>
> > Didn't Hitler make war on children?
>
> Gee. Some photos of dead babies of vaguely Middle Eastern appearance.
Yeah! I only included it so you could have a laugh and casually
dismiss it, you loathsome piece of filth.
> Collect this kind of porn then do you?
Actually the most pornographic thing on the web, is you.
DM
Using WP against the UN gains Israel nothing you can think of. That
does not mean Israel did not see a tactical advantage you don't know
about, or can't bring yourself to think about.
An obvious motive is they didn't want the fuel in the trucks and the
supplies in the warehouse being used in the Palestinian Territory.
Another is to cause the UN to keep their heads down while they
performed even more nasty things elsewhere in the Territory.
Whatever the reason, the attack took place.
Can you bring yourself to admit it wasn't a nice thing to do?
DM
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
> It's the Joos!!!!
Oops, nothing left...
bringyagrogalong
Fuck off Shitstack
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
> I forgot to mention the Israeli attack on the UN compound using white
> phosphorous happened about the same time the UN Secretary General was
> arriving in Israel. he received news of the attack as soon as he arrived.
> I'd say it was an excellent way of telling him to fuck off and stop
> interfering with Israeli affairs.
ROFL!! You retarded shit. As someone else has pointed out, Israel knows
that the eyes of the whole world are upon us. We know that if we put a
foot wrong, we'll be accused of 'murder'. So you can bet every last penny
that your parents give you in pocket money that Tsahal goes to great pains
to avoid the huge propaganda 'disasters' that inevitably follow a civilian
death.
Unlike the Hamas, however, who receive billions of euros in aid from the
EU, and who use it to buy Qassam rockets. None of the aid money goes to
build shelters, and yet when the inevitable conflict comes around and
civilians are being used as human shields behind which the Hamas stores,
prepares and fires its rockets, not a peep comes from the brain-dead Nazi
swine like you.
The Hamas is in a 'win-win' situation. A Jew dies, they love it. A
'Palestinian' (sic) dies, they love it, 'cos everyone blames the Jews
anyway.
In the first few days of Cast Lead, a rocket that had been fired from Gaza
into Israel, went awry and seriously injured a young 'Palestinian' (sic)
girl. She was taken to hospital in Israel, treated and as far as I'm
aware, made a recovery. This was at the same time that the 'Palestinians'
(sic) were trying to murder every single Jew in Israel.
> It wasn't very nice though, won't you agree?
I've already told you, you fuckin' simpleton: every country does 'not very
nice things'. Unlike other countries, however, Israel goes out of its way
not to have to do such things.
You fucking dolt.
Peter Webb
____________________________
These are bullshit reasons. Obviously the attack was a PR disaster for
Israel, they gained no advantage in any way comparable to the damage that it
caused them, and they are not stupid. Clearly they did not target UN
civbilians with WP to destroy a couple of trucks not even being used for
military purposes.
Whatever the reason, the attack took place.
____________________________
They told us the reason, and its quite plausible. On the other hand, they
would have to be fucking idiots to deliberately target UN civilians with
white phosphorous for no reason, its insane to suggest they would.
Can you bring yourself to admit it wasn't a nice thing to do?
______________________________
If it was deliberate, of course it would be a horrible thing to do. Of
course.
DM
bringyagrogalong
> Nazi Whackjob <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>
> > I forgot to mention the Israeli attack on the UN compound using white
> > phosphorous happened about the same time the UN Secretary General was
> > arriving in Israel. he received news of the attack as soon as he arrived.
> > I'd say it was an excellent way of telling him to fuck off and stop
> > interfering with Israeli affairs.
>
> ROFL!! You retarded shit. As someone else has pointed out, Israel knows
> that the eyes of the whole world are upon us.
The eyes of the world are on them when they steal palestinian land.
The eyes of the world were on them when they levelled Jenin (Israel's
Lidice) and murdered indiscriminately. Eyes that they didn't want
around when they refused UN access.
The eyes of the world were on them when they razed Gaza
The United Nations fact-finding mission on the Gaza said:
“The mission finds that the conduct of the Israeli armed forces
constitute grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention in respect
of wilful killings and wilfully causing great suffering to protected
persons and as such give rise to individual criminal responsibility,”
the report’s executive summary said. “It also finds that the direct
targeting and arbitrary killing of Palestinian civilians is a
violation of the right to life.”
It went on to criticize the “deliberate and systematic policy on the
part of the Israeli armed forces to target industrial sites and water
installations,” and the use of Palestinian civilians as human shields.
On the objectives and strategy of Israel’s military operation, the
mission concluded that military planners deliberately followed a
doctrine which involved “the application of disproportionate force and
the causing of great damage and destruction to civilian property and
infrastructure, and suffering to civilian populations.”
The eyes of the world were on them when the Sabra and Shatilla
massacres took place, one of the most barbarous events in
recent
history. Thousands of unarmed and defenseless Palestinian refugees--
old men, women, and children-- were butchered in an orgy of savage
killing.
On December 16, 1982, the United Nations General Assembly
condemned the
massacre and declared it to be an act of genocide. In
fact, Israel has
umpteen UN resolutions outstanding against it for a
pattern of persistent,
racist violence which fits the definition of
genocide.
The eyes of the world were on them when they targeted a Palestinian
man trying to protect and used them as target practice. An image ever
bit as
damning as that young female napalm victim in Vietnam.
The eyes of the world were on them when they murdered Rachel Corrie?
Killed by Israelis when she tried to stop them from
an act of ethnic
cleansing when they were destroying Palestinian homes.
And the eyes of the world were on them when they murdered these
children..
http://www.uruknet.de/?p=50118
But of course Israel has never given a shit about the eyes of the
world.
A bit like their German counterparts in WW2
======
"We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation,
and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab
population."
- Israel Koenig.
"There was no such thing as Palestinians, they never existed."
- Golda Meir
"We must do everything to insure the Palestinians never return, the
old will die and the young will forget."
- Ben Gurion
"We must expel Arabs and take their places."
- Ben Gurion
B J Foster
> DM <israeli.apologist...@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>> I forgot to mention the Israeli attack on the UN compound using white
>> phosphorous happened about the same time the UN Secretary General was
>> arriving in Israel. he received news of the attack as soon as he
>> arrived. I'd say it was an excellent way of telling him to fuck off
>> and stop interfering with Israeli affairs.
>>
>> It wasn't very nice though, won't you agree?
>
> Indeed!
>
> But the Israelis aren't very nice people...
>
> http://www.uruknet.de/?p=50118
Hamas stands behind the children of Gaza!!!
B J Foster
>
> Can you bring yourself to admit it wasn't a nice thing to do?
I've not seen any condemnation of Hamas from you. It follows that you
are only interested in finding fault with Israel and *not* in the
business of impartial condemnation of all atrocities.
You are a hypocrite - and it is pointless debating this any further.
>
> DM
>
>
>
Peter Webb
"Jewish Whackjob" <yitz...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Nazi Whackjob <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>
> > I forgot to mention the Israeli attack on the UN compound using white
> > phosphorous happened about the same time the UN Secretary General was
> > arriving in Israel. he received news of the attack as soon as he
> > arrived.
> > I'd say it was an excellent way of telling him to fuck off and stop
> > interfering with Israeli affairs.
>
> ROFL!! You retarded shit. As someone else has pointed out, Israel knows
> that the eyes of the whole world are upon us.
The eyes of the world are on them when they steal palestinian land.
_________________
And blah blah. But in every case you list, Israel gained something obvious.
Yet they didn't and couldn't in this case. Your theory holds no water. But
as I mentioned previously, the alternative explanation - that it was an
accident - has many, many precedents - shit like this happens all the time
in war.
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
>
> "bringyagrogalong" <sof...@aapt.net.au> wrote in message
> news:0eefddb7-1547-4d74...@z41g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...
> "Jewish Whackjob" <yitz...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Nazi Whackjob <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>>
>> > I forgot to mention the Israeli attack on the UN compound using white
>> > phosphorous happened about the same time the UN Secretary General was
>> > arriving in Israel. he received news of the attack as soon as he
>> > arrived.
>> > I'd say it was an excellent way of telling him to fuck off and stop
>> > interfering with Israeli affairs.
>>
>> ROFL!! You retarded shit. As someone else has pointed out, Israel knows
>> that the eyes of the whole world are upon us.
>
> The eyes of the world are on them when they steal palestinian
_Who_ ??
{ snip unread }
DM
They gained a warehouse full of fuel and food that didn't make it to
their enemy.
They also gained a diplomatic message that no-one gets in their way,
even the UN.
I see you are describing it as an accident now, rather than a smoke
screen to conceal tanks in narrow streets. Do you now admit the smoke
screen story is ludicrous?
BTW here is a link to the Human Rights Watch report on the incident:
http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/db900SID/MYAI-7QF7GQ
DM
Peter Webb
On Dec 31, 1:53 am, "Peter Webb"
<webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> "bringyagrogalong" <sof...@aapt.net.au> wrote in message
>
> news:0eefddb7-1547-4d74...@z41g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...
>
> "Jewish Whackjob" <yitz...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Nazi Whackjob <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>
> > > I forgot to mention the Israeli attack on the UN compound using white
> > > phosphorous happened about the same time the UN Secretary General was
> > > arriving in Israel. he received news of the attack as soon as he
> > > arrived.
> > > I'd say it was an excellent way of telling him to fuck off and stop
> > > interfering with Israeli affairs.
>
> > ROFL!! You retarded shit. As someone else has pointed out, Israel knows
> > that the eyes of the whole world are upon us.
>
> The eyes of the world are on them when they steal palestinian land.
>
> _________________
> And blah blah. But in every case you list, Israel gained something
> obvious.
> Yet they didn't and couldn't in this case. Your theory holds no water. But
> as I mentioned previously, the alternative explanation - that it was an
> accident - has many, many precedents - shit like this happens all the time
> in war.
They gained a warehouse full of fuel and food that didn't make it to
their enemy.
___________________________________
No, they did not "gain" them.
They also gained a diplomatic message that no-one gets in their way,
even the UN.
____________________________
Which they don't need. And could far more easily have been accomplished by
simply cancelling the visa of the UN Secretary General and other UN
employees. You don't need to attack civilians with WP to send a message to
the UN.
I see you are describing it as an accident now,
______________________________
Hitting a UN worker with WP was obviously an accident. There is no plausible
reason whatsoever to do this deliberately.
rather than a smoke
screen to conceal tanks in narrow streets. Do you now admit the smoke
screen story is ludicrous?
___________________________
The smoke story is entirely consistent with the facts as we know them.
Civilians in war zones get hit accidentally all the time.Your alternate
theory is simply ludicrous. You have provided no motive or explanation.
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
>> And blah blah. But in every case you list, Israel gained something
>> obvious. Yet they didn't and couldn't in this case. Your theory holds
>> no water. But as I mentioned previously, the alternative explanation -
>> that it was an accident - has many, many precedents - shit like this
>> happens all the time in war.
> They gained a warehouse full of fuel and food that didn't make it to
> their enemy.
LMAO!!
Yeah, we really need all the food we can get, eh? Fuckin' starvin', so we
are.
You. Fucking. Spastic.
{ snip unread }
B J Foster
Why is your focus entirely on one incident?
Is this not 'fomenting hatred' against the Israelis?
DM
wrote:
> On 2009-12-31, DM <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>
> >> And blah blah. But in every case you list, Israel gained something
> >> obvious. Yet they didn't and couldn't in this case. Your theory holds
> >> no water. But as I mentioned previously, the alternative explanation -
> >> that it was an accident - has many, many precedents - shit like this
> >> happens all the time in war.
> > They gained a warehouse full of fuel and food that didn't make it to
> > their enemy.
>
> LMAO!!
>
> Yeah, we really need all the food we can get, eh? Fuckin' starvin', so we
> are.
No, the Palestinians really needed that food and fuel. The Israelis
destroyed it. Israel has been maintaining a blockade in Palestinians
since they elected a Hamas majority government. Deliberately starving
civilians and withholding medical supplies isn't very nice either, but
it seems to be a clear objective of Israeli policy.
You Zionists are digging yourselves deeper and deeper into the shit.
You've clearly got to the point where swallowing it doesn't bother
you.
>
> You. Fucking. Spastic.
Nice one, using assumed disability as an insult.
Time to wipe the spittle off your keyboard and use your brain.
DM
DM
Do you really think people will be inclined to hate Israel if they
know Israel bombarded a clearly marked UN compound known to contain
fuel tankers with white phosphorous?
With any luck it may cause Israelis to open their eyes and stop their
government doing hateful things in their name.
I certainly wouldn't want my government attacking the UN, even with
weapons that aren't banned under international treaty.
Using WP as an incendiary weapon against a location known to contain
inflammable liquid as well as internationally protected people and
civilian refugees is an abhorrent act. I would condemn the act
regardless of who committed it.
I am on the record condemning abhorrent acts by all sorts of people,
governments and organisations. For me it is the act that is abhorrent,
regardless of the people responsible.
For some people Israel is a sacred cow, immune to criticism no matter
how abhorrent the acts they perform.
Immunity fro criticism is dangerous, it has led Israel to the point
their actions are comparable with those of the Nazis. They too felt
they were beyond criticism, and we all know where that led them.
BTW if you feel my focus is too narrow, you are welcome to start
another discussion about the Israeli bombardment of a clearly marked
UN observation post in Lebanon. That wasn't very nice either.
If you find my line of discussion disturbing perhaps you should simply
acknowledge that some of the things Israel has done are despicable.
Denial only makes you appear foolish. Denial is also the inevitable
final stage of a genocide process, after the atrocities have been
committed. By assisting with the denial you are participating in the
process.
http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com/document/genocide8.htm
(oddly I think it may have been you who pointed me to this document in
the first place)
DM
DM
Peter Webb
phosphorous is a terrible thing to do.
I agree with you, and I expect that most other people would as well.
What you have spectacularly failed to do is provide a motive for why Israel
would deliberately attack unarmed UN civilians with white phosphorous
commensurate with the "hit" to Israel's public image. How could this
possibly be in Israel's national interest? Your explanation - that the
Israelis wanted to steal a food truck - is laughable.
So your theory obviously has a major hole you seem unable to plug. Unlike
the alternate explanation that some smokescreen pellets went astray.
Provoding a smokescreen for tanks is a lot more plausible explanantion than
the IDF was trying to steal a food truck.
Peter Webb
On Jan 1, 6:07 am, "yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)" <yitz...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> On 2009-12-31, DM <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>
> >> And blah blah. But in every case you list, Israel gained something
> >> obvious. Yet they didn't and couldn't in this case. Your theory holds
> >> no water. But as I mentioned previously, the alternative explanation -
> >> that it was an accident - has many, many precedents - shit like this
> >> happens all the time in war.
> > They gained a warehouse full of fuel and food that didn't make it to
> > their enemy.
>
> LMAO!!
>
> Yeah, we really need all the food we can get, eh? Fuckin' starvin', so we
> are.
No, the Palestinians really needed that food and fuel. The Israelis
destroyed it. Israel has been maintaining a blockade in Palestinians
since they elected a Hamas majority government. Deliberately starving
civilians and withholding medical supplies isn't very nice either, but
it seems to be a clear objective of Israeli policy.
________________________________
The Israelis are neither starving the Palestinians or withholding medical
supplies. You seem to have your facts wrong.
You Zionists are digging yourselves deeper and deeper into the shit.
You've clearly got to the point where swallowing it doesn't bother
you.
________________________________
Us "Zionists"? Please define "Zionist", so I can see exactly what I am
accused of being.
>
> You. Fucking. Spastic.
Nice one, using assumed disability as an insult.
Time to wipe the spittle off your keyboard and use your brain.
___________________________
OTOH, you could learn some facts before you start providing opinions.
DM
DM
wrote:
> You keep saying that deliberately attacking unarmed UN civilians with white
> phosphorous is a terrible thing to do.
>
> I agree with you, and I expect that most other people would as well.
>
> What you have spectacularly failed to do is provide a motive for why Israel
> would deliberately attack unarmed UN civilians with white phosphorous
> commensurate with the "hit" to Israel's public image. How could this
> possibly be in Israel's national interest? Your explanation - that the
> Israelis wanted to steal a food truck - is laughable.
Its amazing how blinkered people become when their belief system is
threatened.
I did not say the Israelis wanted to steal a food truck. I said they
wanted to stop food, medical supplies and fuel being used in the
Palestinian Territory. They accomplished this by setting fire to the
UN compound with white phosphorous. I also said they wanted to send a
strong message to the UN that interference in Israeli affairs was
unwelcome. A incendiary attack using white phosphorous on the fuel
trucks in the UN compound just as the UN Secretary General was
arriving in Israel accomplished these objectives.
> So your theory obviously has a major hole you seem unable to plug. Unlike
> the alternate explanation that some smokescreen pellets went astray.
> Provoding a smokescreen for tanks is a lot more plausible explanantion than
> the IDF was trying to steal a food truck.
Oh dear, selective recall too. I'm sure I explained why white
phosphorous smoke is the last thing tank crews need in a narrow street
urban environment. Low visibility leaves them sitting ducks for the
kind of man portable weapons used by Palestinian militia while
rendering their own close protective systems less effective. The smoke
screen explanation is ludicrous. Only a fanatic would believe it, and
only then one compelled to believe it through cognitive dissonance.
Face it Mr Webb, Israel used white phosphorous in a manner that is
banned under international treaty by civilised countries, on a target
it knew to contain internationally protected people, refugees and
humanitarian relief supplies. And they did it at pretty much the exact
time the UN leader was arriving in Israel. Its about as bad as it
gets!
You are being so silly about this I'm beginning to suspect a straw man
argument.
Nobody could be so stupid as to keep defending the indefensible in
this way.
Why do you persist?
DM
Peter Webb
On Jan 1, 1:10 pm, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au>
wrote:
> You keep saying that deliberately attacking unarmed UN civilians with
> white
> phosphorous is a terrible thing to do.
>
> I agree with you, and I expect that most other people would as well.
>
> What you have spectacularly failed to do is provide a motive for why
> Israel
> would deliberately attack unarmed UN civilians with white phosphorous
> commensurate with the "hit" to Israel's public image. How could this
> possibly be in Israel's national interest? Your explanation - that the
> Israelis wanted to steal a food truck - is laughable.
Its amazing how blinkered people become when their belief system is
threatened.
I did not say the Israelis wanted to steal a food truck. I said
____________________________
"They gained a warehouse full of fuel and food that didn't make it to their
enemy." is what you said.
they
wanted to stop food, medical supplies and fuel being used in the
Palestinian Territory.
__________________________
That's funny. Israel lets trucks enter Gaza carrying UN supplies of food and
medical supplies every day.
They accomplished this by setting fire to the
UN compound with white phosphorous. I also said they wanted to send a
strong message to the UN that interference in Israeli affairs was
unwelcome. A incendiary attack using white phosphorous on the fuel
trucks in the UN compound just as the UN Secretary General was
arriving in Israel accomplished these objectives.
________________________________
Gee, they could have done this far more effectively by refusing to see the
UN Secretary General, or by simply booting the UN out of Gaza directly -
neither of which they did.
> So your theory obviously has a major hole you seem unable to plug. Unlike
> the alternate explanation that some smokescreen pellets went astray.
> Provoding a smokescreen for tanks is a lot more plausible explanantion
> than
> the IDF was trying to steal a food truck.
Oh dear, selective recall too. I'm sure I explained why white
phosphorous smoke is the last thing tank crews need in a narrow street
urban environment. Low visibility leaves them sitting ducks for the
kind of man portable weapons used by Palestinian militia while
rendering their own close protective systems less effective. The smoke
screen explanation is ludicrous. Only a fanatic would believe it, and
only then one compelled to believe it through cognitive dissonance.
_________________________
As I said, perhaps you should be offering your advice directly to the IDF;
they do a lot of combined tank/helicopter operations in urban environments,
and could use your expertise.
Face it Mr Webb, Israel used white phosphorous in a manner that is
banned under international treaty by civilised countries, on a target
it knew to contain internationally protected people, refugees and
humanitarian relief supplies. And they did it at pretty much the exact
time the UN leader was arriving in Israel. Its about as bad as it
gets!
_________________________
It was a complete public relations disaster for Israel, with no offsetting
military benefit at all.
You are being so silly about this I'm beginning to suspect a straw man
argument.
Nobody could be so stupid as to keep defending the indefensible in
this way.
________________________________
Do you really believe that Israel deliberately attacked UN unarmed UN
civilians with white phosphorous because they wanted to destroy a parked
truck containing nothing of military value?
Why do you persist?
________________________________
Because your theory that it was deliberate is laughable. There is no motive
in any way commensurate to the damage done to Israel's reputation. It was a
disaster for Israel. Why would they wish that upon themselves?
DM
yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)
> On Jan 1, 6:07 am, "yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)" <yitz...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> On 2009-12-31, DM <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>>
>> >> And blah blah. But in every case you list, Israel gained something
>> >> obvious. Yet they didn't and couldn't in this case. Your theory holds
>> >> no water. But as I mentioned previously, the alternative explanation -
>> >> that it was an accident - has many, many precedents - shit like this
>> >> happens all the time in war.
>> > They gained a warehouse full of fuel and food that didn't make it to
>> > their enemy.
>>
>> LMAO!!
>>
>> Yeah, we really need all the food we can get, eh? Fuckin' starvin', so we
>> are.
> No, the Palestinians really needed that food and fuel.
No doubt. Maybe if they'd not fired around 8,000 rockets, missiles and
mortars towards Israeli children, they'd have got that food.
> The Israelis destroyed it.
Isn't life a bitch?
> Israel has been maintaining a blockade
of weapons.
Does that bother you?
> since they elected a Hamas majority government.
Isn't democracy great? You elect the party you want, and you reap the
benefits. Or, in the case of the 'Palestinians' (sic), you suffer the
consequences.
'The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews
(killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The
stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind
me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, would not do that
because it is one of the trees of the Jews...'
(The Hamas Charter <http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm>)
When you elect a 'government' with phrases like that in its constitution,
you shut the fuck up and accept the consequences.
Is that clear enough for you, you stupid fucking Nazi cunt?
> Deliberately starving civilians and withholding medical supplies isn't
> very nice either, but it seems to be a clear objective of Israeli policy.
You are a liar, and stupid to boot. It has been shown to the satisfaction
of anyone whose IQ is above 6 (obviously excluding you) that only weapons
are stopped at the border. The rest is allowed through. From the Israeli
Ministry of Foreign Affairs website..
'37,159 tons of humanitarian aid on 1503 trucks were transferred via
the Kerem Shalom and Karni crossings (food, medication and medical
supplies)
1,535,750 liters of heavy duty diesel for the Gaza power station
234 tons of gas for domestic use
188,000 liters of diesel for UNRWA vehicles and needs
3,896 tons of grain, on 98 trucks were transferred via the Karni
conveyor belt
20 ambulances were donated by the governments of Turkey and Jordan, and
10 ambulances transferred to the Gaza Strip by the ICRC in order to
meet the needs of the Palestinian Red Crescent Society
449 dual nationals were evacuated via the Erez Crossing
68 chronically ill people and their escorts made their way from Gaza to
Israel, the West Bank and Jordan
37 employees of international organizations and medical staff entered
Gaza via the Erez Crossing
A forward medical clinic was established at Erez by Magen David Adom
Numerous medical movements took place via Rafah, including at least 25
ambulances'
<http://is.gd/5IB4k>
That was during 'Operation Cast Lead'. Over fifteen hundred trucks,
carrying over thirty-seven _thousand_ tons of aid. Also mentioned is the
fuel that Israel continued to supply to Gaza, during the time when the
inhabitants of the latter were doing their best to kill every single Jew
living in Israel. 1,723,750 litres in all.
Not that you care about that, of course...
Imagine it, eh? 1939, the UK declares war on Germany, and at the end of
his speech, Chamberlain adds, 'and we shall continue to supply Germany with
free food, clothing, medical supplies and electricity...'
Sound plausible? Of course not. No other country goes so out of its way
to safeguard the very lives of those who are seeking to destroy it.
> You Zionists are digging yourselves deeper and deeper into the shit.
I rather suspect that the only 'shit' we get on ourselves, is that which is
deposited on the toes of our boots, when they sink four inches up your Nazi
rectums.
> You've clearly got to the point where swallowing it doesn't bother
> you.
Personally, I prefer wiping it off with a tissue.
>> You. Fucking. Spastic.
> Nice one, using assumed disability as an insult.
Oh, I'm sorry. I'd assumed English was your native language.
> Time to wipe the spittle off your keyboard and use your brain.
Heh. Listen to this, from the guy whose left thigh has weals where his
clenched fist has been hammering into it.
DM
wrote:
> "DM" <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote in message
>
> news:9f0c1ab2-e60e-468e...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 1, 1:10 pm, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au>
> wrote:
>
> > You keep saying that deliberately attacking unarmed UN civilians with
> > white
> > phosphorous is a terrible thing to do.
>
> > I agree with you, and I expect that most other people would as well.
>
> > What you have spectacularly failed to do is provide a motive for why
> > Israel
> > would deliberately attack unarmed UN civilians with white phosphorous
> > commensurate with the "hit" to Israel's public image. How could this
> > possibly be in Israel's national interest? Your explanation - that the
> > Israelis wanted to steal a food truck - is laughable.
>
> Its amazing how blinkered people become when their belief system is
> threatened.
>
> I did not say the Israelis wanted to steal a food truck. I said
>
> ____________________________
> "They gained a warehouse full of fuel and food that didn't make it to their
> enemy." is what you said.
Certainly the gain was that the warehouse full of fuel and food that:
->didn't make it to their enemy<-
Its not like the Israelis needed the food and fuel. They aren't being
blockaded.
But the Israelis do blockade the Palestinians, so preventing food and
fuel reaching the Palestinians is clearly an Israeli objective.
destroying to food, fuel and medical supplies stored in the UN
compound achieved that objective.
Honestly Mr Webb, this is getting embarrassing. Give up and admit the
Israelis did something reprehensible why don't you? Firebombing the UN
with white phosphous is about as bad as it gets!
>
> they
> wanted to stop food, medical supplies and fuel being used in the
> Palestinian Territory.
>
> __________________________
> That's funny. Israel lets trucks enter Gaza carrying UN supplies of food and
> medical supplies every day.
They also stop trucks entering Gaza carrying UN humanitarian aid every
day. The aim of the blockade is to make life difficult for
Palestinians. Starving Palestinian civilians and restricting their
access to medical supplies isn't very nice, is it?
In particular Israel has been blockading fuel imports to the
Territory. This has led to a total collapse of agriculture and
fishing. UN food imports only cover about two thirds of the dietary
needs of Palestinians with the rest sourced from produce. According to
the World Health Organization, one third of children under five and
women of childbearing age are anaemic. The Gazan organisation Ard al-
Insan is treating 4,000 malnourished children, and says it has seen
increases in signs of malnutrition under the blockade.
> They accomplished this by setting fire to the
> UN compound with white phosphorous. I also said they wanted to send a
> strong message to the UN that interference in Israeli affairs was
> unwelcome. A incendiary attack using white phosphorous on the fuel
> trucks in the UN compound just as the UN Secretary General was
> arriving in Israel accomplished these objectives.
>
> ________________________________
> Gee, they could have done this far more effectively by refusing to see the
> UN Secretary General, or by simply booting the UN out of Gaza directly -
> neither of which they did.
Instead they bombarded his warehouse with white phosphorous as a
greeting. Not a nice thing to do, but clearly they thought it was
worth it.
> > So your theory obviously has a major hole you seem unable to plug. Unlike
> > the alternate explanation that some smokescreen pellets went astray.
> > Provoding a smokescreen for tanks is a lot more plausible explanantion
> > than
> > the IDF was trying to steal a food truck.
>
> Oh dear, selective recall too. I'm sure I explained why white
> phosphorous smoke is the last thing tank crews need in a narrow street
> urban environment. Low visibility leaves them sitting ducks for the
> kind of man portable weapons used by Palestinian militia while
> rendering their own close protective systems less effective. The smoke
> screen explanation is ludicrous. Only a fanatic would believe it, and
> only then one compelled to believe it through cognitive dissonance.
>
> _________________________
> As I said, perhaps you should be offering your advice directly to the IDF;
> they do a lot of combined tank/helicopter operations in urban environments,
> and could use your expertise.
I don't need to offer my advice to the IDF, they are very good at
urban warfare. They already know how silly it would be to surround
their own tanks with WP smoke in a narrow street urban area.
> Face it Mr Webb, Israel used white phosphorous in a manner that is
> banned under international treaty by civilised countries, on a target
> it knew to contain internationally protected people, refugees and
> humanitarian relief supplies. And they did it at pretty much the exact
> time the UN leader was arriving in Israel. Its about as bad as it
> gets!
>
> _________________________
> It was a complete public relations disaster for Israel, with no offsetting
> military benefit at all.
The warehouse full of humanitarian aid was destroyed and the UN did
receive a message. Mission accomplished if you don't give a shit about
what civilised people think of you.
> You are being so silly about this I'm beginning to suspect a straw man
> argument.
> Nobody could be so stupid as to keep defending the indefensible in
> this way.
>
> ________________________________
> Do you really believe that Israel deliberately attacked UN unarmed UN
> civilians with white phosphorous because they wanted to destroy a parked
> truck containing nothing of military value?
No, I believe Israel deliberately attacked a clearly marked UN
facility containing internationally protected persons and refugees
with white phosphorous because they wanted to destroy the convoy of
trucks the UN reported were present there. Israel takes the trouble to
blockade fuel supplies from the Palestinian Territory so clearly they
do see a military value in withholding fuel from the Palestinians.
You are on a hiding to nothing here Peter, why do you persist?
>
> Why do you persist?
>
> ________________________________
> Because your theory that it was deliberate is laughable. There is no motive
> in any way commensurate to the damage done to Israel's reputation. It was a
> disaster for Israel. Why would they wish that upon themselves?
Not deliberate? The UN provided the co-ordinates of every one of its
facilities at the commencement of the offensive. The local controller
had been in regular contact with the IDF throughout the day
complaining that shrapnel from artillery bursts was threatening his
position. Soon after he phoned to warn the IDF a fuel convoy was now
located at his position the position was bombarded with white
phosphorous. The Israelis were in no doubt the position was a UN
facility and that fuel trucks were parked there, and they switched to
incendiary weapons as soon as the presence of the fuel convoy was
confirmed. Claiming the attack was not deliberate is at about the same
point on the ludicrosity scale as holocaust denial.
DM
B J Foster
A very mediocre evasion.
This is just one incident attributed to Israel. What about the THOUSANDS
of missile, mortar and suicide attacks on Israeli civilians? Why do
*you* David Moss find it so difficult to censure Hamas? Why the radical
bias in favour of a terrorist organisation responsible for thousands
of atrocities?
In any case, as you are well aware, it is completely irrelevant to
Muslim extremists whether or not Israel does the right thing - they have
vowed to destroy Israel regardless of what Israel does.
Your radically biased stance and wilful ignorance of the reasons
underpinning the "hate" of Israel show that you are arguing dishonestly.
>
> With any luck it may cause Israelis to open their eyes and stop their
> government doing hateful things in their name.
On the contrary, Israel's survival does not depend on luck - it depends
on being one step ahead of fanatical murderers who will most definitely
not cease their atrocities if Israel decides to be 'Mr Nice Guy'. You
need to learn a thing or two about negotiation:
1. Palestinians use negotiation as a weapon. They have reneged on every
single agreement that they have ever made - the most important one being
the Oslo Accords.
2. Giving away concessions will never attract concessions.
I worry that you post from an ADFA address and hold these attitudes and
have these weaknesses.
>
> I certainly wouldn't want my government attacking the UN, even with
> weapons that aren't banned under international treaty.
You have not shown that they did.
>
> Using WP as an incendiary weapon against a location known to contain
> inflammable liquid as well as internationally protected people and
> civilian refugees is an abhorrent act. I would condemn the act
> regardless of who committed it.
You have not shown that they did.
>
> I am on the record condemning abhorrent acts by all sorts of people,
> governments and organisations. For me it is the act that is abhorrent,
> regardless of the people responsible.
Sure. Did 'they' commit the act?
>
> For some people Israel is a sacred cow, immune to criticism no matter
> how abhorrent the acts they perform.
ROTFL. Quite the opposite. Israel gets criticised no mater what they do
- the most famous example being the destruction of Osirak. They *alone*
solved the problem in the face of criticism from every other country.
Tell me what *you* would do to solve the problem of Hamas in Gaza.
>
> Immunity fro criticism is dangerous, it has led Israel to the point
> their actions are comparable with those of the Nazis. They too felt
> they were beyond criticism, and we all know where that led them.
They are not immune from criticism & they act with the law. In fact, the
IDF was instructed by the Israeli Supreme court to protect its citizens
- as I have shown.
But you yourself act as if you are immune from criticism: What would you
do in their shoes:
1. Bomb Gaza to smithereens from a safe distance
2. Launch a ground atack *knowing* that IDF troops would be killed.
3. Blockade and stop the inflow of missiles and weapons.
Instead of criticising, tell us what *you* would do.
>
> BTW if you feel my focus is too narrow, you are welcome to start
> another discussion about the Israeli bombardment of a clearly marked
> UN observation post in Lebanon. That wasn't very nice either.
Still not one single mention of Hamas (or Hezbollah) atrocities, I see.
Is Israel judged according to a different yardstick? Is it that you
favour terrs, or is it merely your own deep-seated bigotry that biases
your criticism so radically?
>
> If you find my line of discussion disturbing perhaps you should simply
> acknowledge that some of the things Israel has done are despicable.
I noted how the UN quickly moved to *correct* the allegation about the
school bombing - but this only happened when a teacher had reported the
truth. Didn't stop the pack of lying jackals (including you?) trying to
make something of it.
Do you think that Israelis never break the law. You are naive.
What matters is that they have a law & they are held accountable of they
break it. In contrast, Hamas have no principles and no laws except a
mindless suicidal mission t "destroy Israel".
What matters *here* is that you are completely & utterly biased as you
only criticise Israel - yet you have not proven that one single incident
is an atrocity.
>
> Denial only makes you appear foolish. Denial is also the inevitable
> final stage of a genocide process, after the atrocities have been
> committed. By assisting with the denial you are participating in the
> process.
You are in denial. If there was any substance in your allegations, then
*Israeli* human rights organisations would have acted against the IDF.
>
> http://politics.sunnybar.dynip.com/document/genocide8.htm
>
> (oddly I think it may have been you who pointed me to this document in
> the first place)
Indeed. "The strongest antidote to genocide is justice"
In the case of Israel, you can report your allegations to any number f
Israeli human rights organisations - and some international ones. If
there is any substance, they can take action against the IDF in Israeli
courts.
Where is your condemnation of Hamas?
Not that you can do anything about it - how long would you survive *in*
Gaza if you accused them of anything? 10 seconds?
>
> DM
>
broadssailor
An erudite contribution to the debate as usual. Ever thought of
entering politics - as a Republican of course.
DM
wrote:
> "DM" <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote in message
>
> news:3d4c9012-945e-4911...@m26g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 1, 6:07 am, "yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)" <yitz...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On 2009-12-31, DM <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote:
>
> > >> And blah blah. But in every case you list, Israel gained something
> > >> obvious. Yet they didn't and couldn't in this case. Your theory holds
> > >> no water. But as I mentioned previously, the alternative explanation -
> > >> that it was an accident - has many, many precedents - shit like this
> > >> happens all the time in war.
> > > They gained a warehouse full of fuel and food that didn't make it to
> > > their enemy.
>
> > LMAO!!
>
> > Yeah, we really need all the food we can get, eh? Fuckin' starvin', so we
> > are.
>
> No, the Palestinians really needed that food and fuel. The Israelis
> destroyed it. Israel has been maintaining a blockade in Palestinians
> since they elected a Hamas majority government. Deliberately starving
> civilians and withholding medical supplies isn't very nice either, but
> it seems to be a clear objective of Israeli policy.
>
> ________________________________
> The Israelis are neither starving the Palestinians or withholding medical
> supplies. You seem to have your facts wrong.
I suppose the Word Health Organisation has it wrong too?
"The Israeli military operation in December and January 2009 disrupted
food aid transfer and distribution significantly, as well as causing
what the UN FAO estimates at $180m of damage to the agricultural
sector.
According to the World Health Organization, one third of children
under five and women of childbearing age are anaemic. The Gazan
organisation Ard al-Insan is treating 4,000 malnourished children, and
says it has seen increases in signs of malnutrition under the
blockade." (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7545636.stm)
>
> You Zionists are digging yourselves deeper and deeper into the shit.
> You've clearly got to the point where swallowing it doesn't bother
> you.
>
> ________________________________
> Us "Zionists"? Please define "Zionist", so I can see exactly what I am
> accused of being.
Sure, the Wikipedia entry is as good as any:
"Zionism (Hebrew: ציונות, Tsiyonut) is the international political
movement that originally supported the reestablishment of a homeland
for the Jewish people in the Land of Israel (Hebrew: Eretz Yisra'el),
the historical homeland of the Jews. Since the establishment of the
State of Israel, the Zionist movement continues primarily to support
it."
>
> > You. Fucking. Spastic.
>
> Nice one, using assumed disability as an insult.
> Time to wipe the spittle off your keyboard and use your brain.
>
> ___________________________
> OTOH, you could learn some facts before you start providing opinions.
I tend to do enough research on a topic that I can post an informed
opinion.
I have no emotional inhibitions preventing an objective analysis of
this issue. You clearly do.
Do you know how dangerous blindly supporting any cause can be?
DM
broadssailor
wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1YusgoQ9bM
Who is Mark Regev?
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Mark-Regev/31287961499?_fb_noscript=1
broadssailor
> This is just one incident attributed to Israel. What about the THOUSANDS
> of missile, mortar and suicide attacks on Israeli civilians?
Well here's a link from an official Israeli paper regarding the
effects of some of those thousands of attacks
"4. Since 2001 rocket fire has been directly responsible for the
deaths of ten Israeli civilians , nine of them Sderot residents. In
addition, 433 individuals have been wounded, 3 the overwhelming
majority of them civilians, and during the past year and a half more
than 1,600 instances of stress were reported. Mortar fire has been
responsible for the deaths of ten individuals, eight civilians and two
IDF soldiers . Of the 150 wounded, 80 were civilians and 70 soldiers"
Get that? Stress in 1600 instances. They had the shit scared out of
them! Not starved, deprived of food, power, medical services, Just
scared shitless.
Well, I suppose that's always a possibility when you engage in war.
It's a pity that no body seems to have reported on the instances of
stess amongst Palestinians. It would also be informative to know how
many have died due to their being unable to access the drugs, medical
supplies and surgery etc. which they have urgently required.
In the interests of completeness, here is a link giving the numbers
killed since late 2000 http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/deaths.html
Peter Webb
No, I believe Israel deliberately attacked a clearly marked UN
facility containing internationally protected persons and refugees
with white phosphorous because they wanted to destroy the convoy of
trucks the UN reported were present there.
________________________________
Well, you live on planet bizarro.
The amusing irony to your fantasy is that if the Israelis really wanted to
destroy some trucks in a UN facility, they wouldn't use white phosphorous
(completely useless against vehicles) they would have used ordinary HE. And
those vehicles would have been destroyed entirely. Indeed, if the Israelis
wanted to destroy the UN facility, it would have been destroyed. With a
crater visible from space, if they wanted.
Peter Webb
> "4. Since 2001 rocket fire has been directly responsible for the
> deaths of ten Israeli civilians , nine of them Sderot residents. In
> addition, 433 individuals have been wounded, 3 the overwhelming
> majority of them civilians, and during the past year and a half more
> than 1,600 instances of stress were reported. Mortar fire has been
> responsible for the deaths of ten individuals, eight civilians and two
> IDF soldiers . Of the 150 wounded, 80 were civilians and 70 soldiers"
>
Makes you wonder why Hamas bother at all, when they are so ineffectual. What
a pack of losers.
Peter Webb
__________________________________
Funnilky enough, no mention of medical aid being blockaded, and the closest
you get to a blockade is a "disruption" that occurred a year ago.
>
> You Zionists are digging yourselves deeper and deeper into the shit.
> You've clearly got to the point where swallowing it doesn't bother
> you.
>
> ________________________________
> Us "Zionists"? Please define "Zionist", so I can see exactly what I am
> accused of being.
Sure, the Wikipedia entry is as good as any:
"Zionism (Hebrew: ציונות, Tsiyonut) is the international political
movement that originally supported the reestablishment of a homeland
for the Jewish people in the Land of Israel (Hebrew: Eretz Yisra'el),
the historical homeland of the Jews. Since the establishment of the
State of Israel, the Zionist movement continues primarily to support
it."
____________________________________
Terrific. So a Zionist is anybody who supports the right to exist of a
Jewish state of Israel, which includes a whole lot of Muslim leaders and
Muslim head of State. Are you a Zionist then as well, or do you deny
Israel's right to exist?
DM
I'm really beginning to wonder if you are running a straw man agenda
to draw out criticism of Israel. Its not like references to Israel
blockading medical supplies are difficult to find. Here's one off the
top:
"Now the main point for goods entry, Kerem Shalom is currently open
for the limited import of authorised goods. Medicines and medical
equipment are often denied entry, with little or no notice or
explanation. Goods being allowed in represent just a fraction of the
amount entering before the start of the blockade and are completely
inadequate for the needs of Gaza’s people. " (Medical Aid for
Palestinians, a London based aid agency)
Do you agree Israel is behaving barbarically yet?
> > You Zionists are digging yourselves deeper and deeper into the shit.
> > You've clearly got to the point where swallowing it doesn't bother
> > you.
>
> > ________________________________
> > Us "Zionists"? Please define "Zionist", so I can see exactly what I am
> > accused of being.
>
> Sure, the Wikipedia entry is as good as any:
>
> "Zionism (Hebrew: ציונות, Tsiyonut) is the international political
> movement that originally supported the reestablishment of a homeland
> for the Jewish people in the Land of Israel (Hebrew: Eretz Yisra'el),
> the historical homeland of the Jews. Since the establishment of the
> State of Israel, the Zionist movement continues primarily to support
> it."
>
> ____________________________________
> Terrific. So a Zionist is anybody who supports the right to exist of a
> Jewish state of Israel, which includes a whole lot of Muslim leaders and
> Muslim head of State. Are you a Zionist then as well, or do you deny
> Israel's right to exist?
I didn't notice the word "exist" in my quote above. I just noted the
word "support".
BTW I believe Israel has the right to *try* to exist, same as any
other nation, organisation or person. I do not believe they have a
right to attack internationally protected persons however.
Do you think it is acceptable for Israel (or any nation for that
matter) to attack the UN when they are operating in a humanitarian
relief or peace monitoring capacity?
Will you denounce Israel for doing so?
Or will you continue to blindly support Israel no matter what
atrocities they commit?
DM
B J Foster
> On Jan 1, 11:20 pm, "Peter Webb"
> <webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
>> "DM" <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote in message
>>
>
> Or will you continue to blindly support Israel no matter what
> atrocities they commit?
What atrocities has Israel committed?
Why do you never talk about Hamas atrocities?
>
> DM
>
bringyagrogalong
> DM wrote:
>
> > Or will you continue to blindly support Israel no matter what
> > atrocities they commit?
>
> What atrocities has Israel committed?
These readily spring to mind: Jenin (Palestine's Lidice); Gaza, which
left more than 1400 Palestinians including 300 children dead; the
Sabra and Shatila massacres which the United Nations General Assembly
condemned as an act of genocide.
And of course this..
http://www.uruknet.de/?p=50118
> Why do you never talk about Hamas atrocities?
Because it's like comparing atrocities committed by the Nazis to those
committed by the underground in Nazi occupied Europe.
====
Ask not whether I am antisemitic - ask only whether I am right.
- John Bryant
DM
DM
> > On Jan 1, 11:20 pm, "Peter Webb"
> > <webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >> "DM" <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > Or will you continue to blindly support Israel no matter what
> > atrocities they commit?
>
> What atrocities has Israel committed?
If you don't consider bombarding a UN humanitarian aid facility with
white phosphorous atrocious it may be difficult finding something that
will satisfy you.
> Why do you never talk about Hamas atrocities?
Is Hamas a country?
DM
Peter Webb
"Now the main point for goods entry, Kerem Shalom is currently open
for the limited import of authorised goods. Medicines and medical
equipment are often denied entry, with little or no notice or
explanation. Goods being allowed in represent just a fraction of the
amount entering before the start of the blockade and are completely
inadequate for the needs of Gaza’s people. " (Medical Aid for
Palestinians, a London based aid agency)
__________________________________
Ohhh, so Israel is not denying Palestinians food and medical supplies.
According to a Palestininian based in London, food and medical equipment are
shipped in, but at one border crossing these are sometimes denied entry.
That is very far from a blockade as you claimed.
Furthermore, Hamas (the Government of Gaza) is committed to the destruction
of the State of Israel. Its as if during the London blitz of WW2 England was
supplying Germany with food, medical supplies, fuel, and electricity, and
then people (such as yourself) complaining that not enough was being done by
England to support Germany.
Do you recall any previous situation where two States are at war, but one of
these continues to feed and support the civilian population of the other
country even when they are at war? Has any country, ever, done more to
support the civilian population of a nation attacking it than Israel has for
Gaza? Got a single example?
Do you agree Israel is behaving barbarically yet?
_____________________________________
So you don't want to discuss events, you just want to find examples where
Israel has acted barbarically.
> > You Zionists are digging yourselves deeper and deeper into the shit.
> > You've clearly got to the point where swallowing it doesn't bother
> > you.
>
> > ________________________________
> > Us "Zionists"? Please define "Zionist", so I can see exactly what I am
> > accused of being.
>
> Sure, the Wikipedia entry is as good as any:
>
> "Zionism (Hebrew: ציונות, Tsiyonut) is the international political
> movement that originally supported the reestablishment of a homeland
> for the Jewish people in the Land of Israel (Hebrew: Eretz Yisra'el),
> the historical homeland of the Jews. Since the establishment of the
> State of Israel, the Zionist movement continues primarily to support
> it."
>
> ____________________________________
> Terrific. So a Zionist is anybody who supports the right to exist of a
> Jewish state of Israel, which includes a whole lot of Muslim leaders and
> Muslim head of State. Are you a Zionist then as well, or do you deny
> Israel's right to exist?
I didn't notice the word "exist" in my quote above. I just noted the
word "support".
_______________________________________
OK, do you "support" the right to exist of the Jewish State of Israel, and
are therefore a Zionist?
BTW I believe Israel has the right to *try* to exist, same as any
other nation, organisation or person. I do not believe they have a
right to attack internationally protected persons however.
__________________________________
The definition of Zionism does not mention anything about attacking other
people. The definition of Zionism you provided entails only support for the
existence of the Jewish State of Israel. You are either a Zionist by this
definition or you are not. Which is it? And if you are not a Zionist, which
part of the definition do you fail to meet?
Do you think it is acceptable for Israel (or any nation for that
matter) to attack the UN when they are operating in a humanitarian
relief or peace monitoring capacity?
___________________________
Gee, you really are a broken record. To do this deliberately would not be
acceptable. I think we all agreed on this several posts ago. However, while
you are happy to go on and on about how terrible it is (which nobody
denies), you have not provided any evidence it was deliberate, and all the
evidence suggests otherwise.
Will you denounce Israel for doing so?
Or will you continue to blindly support Israel no matter what
atrocities they commit?
_________________________
No. I don't blindly support Israel. There are lots of things they do that I
disagree with. However, the incident at the UN compound was obviously not
deliberate. Israel would have no interest in destroying 2 UN trucks; they
literally let thousands of UN trucks enter Gaza during operation Cast Lead,
had done so prior to Cast Lead, and have done so since. A couple of trucks
means nothing. And nor would they use white phosphorous to attack trucks; it
just bounces off and is useless. And nor is there a single reason in the
reason they would want UN workers hit with white phosphorous; it gained them
nothing at all other than a massive loss of public opinion for Israel.
Finally, if Israel had wanted to destroy a UN facility in Gaza, it would
have been destroyed - properly, using high explosives, and completely. There
is simply no motive whatsoever for Israel attacking UN workers with white
phosphorous, it is a laughable theory.
DM
_______________________
Of course, if you wanted to discuss Hamas's war crimes, that is a whole lot
easier. No question about them targetting civilians, ignoring the Geneva
convention, and exporting terror to Israel; they don't deny it, they are
proud of it. Again, you are using a completely different moral yardstick for
Israel. I consider this somewhat racist - everybody expects Israel to abide
by a much higher moral standard than Hamas, because Israel is a developed
and civilised country with the Rule of Law, whereas Hamas is just a group of
crazy Muslims so really what can you expect from them?
Peter Webb
On Jan 2, 11:27 am, B J Foster <bjfos...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
> DM wrote:
> > On Jan 1, 11:20 pm, "Peter Webb"
> > <webbfam...@DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >> "DM" <d-m...@adfa.edu.au> wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > Or will you continue to blindly support Israel no matter what
> > atrocities they commit?
>
> What atrocities has Israel committed?
If you don't consider bombarding a UN humanitarian aid facility with
white phosphorous atrocious it may be difficult finding something that
will satisfy you.
____________________________________
If it was deliberate. You seem to forget it was not.
> Why do you never talk about Hamas atrocities?
Is Hamas a country?
_________________________________
No. It is the government of Gaza. So what? Or are you now going to redefine
"atrocity" as only being something committed by a member Stae of the UN, and
as Gaza is not a member of the UN by definition it cannot commit atrocities?
DM
Peter Webb
>B J Foster <israeli.apologist...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
>> DM wrote:
>>
>> > Or will you continue to blindly support Israel no matter what
>> > atrocities they commit?
>>
>> What atrocities has Israel committed?
>
> These readily spring to mind: Jenin (Palestine's Lidice); Gaza, which
> left more than 1400 Palestinians including 300 children dead;
"The Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera quoted Gazans claiming that less
than 600 people had died in the 22-day attack, far fewer than the 1,300
reported by Palestinian health officials.
"It's possible that the death toll in Gaza was 500 or 600 at the most,
mainly youths aged 17 to 23 who were enlisted by Hamas - who sent them to
their deaths," the newspaper quoted a doctor at the main Shifa hospital as
stating.
Other residents told the newspaper Hamas gunmen had used medical facilities
to organise and co-ordinate attacks.
Israeli officials emailed the report around the world and a military officer
condemned Hamas as "monstrous" in its use of civilians to cover its armed
activities. "Entire families in Gaza lived on top of a barrel of explosives
for months without knowing," said Brigadier Eyal Eisenberg."
> the
> Sabra and Shatila massacres which the United Nations General Assembly
> condemned as an act of genocide.
The Sabra and Shatila massacre (Arabic: ????? ???? ???????? Ma?ba?at ?abra
wa Shatila) - or Sabra and Chatila massacre - was a massacre of Palestinian
and Lebanese civilians carried out between 16 and 18 September 1982 by the
Lebanese Forces militia group,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre
Note that this "Israeli atrocity" was 27 years ago, and committed by
Lebanese militia.
If I were looking for examples of Hamas atrocities, I wouldn't need to go
back 27 years to find an atrocity committed by somebody else as an example.
>
> And of course this..
> http://www.uruknet.de/?p=50118
>
More pictures of children of Middle Eastern appearance, some of them
possibly dead, some other with various injuries.
Is this somehow supposed to prove that the attack on the UN compound was
deliberate? How, exactly? Is this really the best evidence you have of
Israeli atrocities - that some children of Middle Eastern appearance have
died and been photographed?
>> Why do you never talk about Hamas atrocities?
>
> Because it's like comparing atrocities committed by the Nazis to those
> committed by the underground in Nazi occupied Europe.
I see. The underground in Europe strapped explosives to themselves and blew
up school busses? They randomly attacked German civilians with rockets?
OTOH, Israel has built gas chamber factories where they march millions of
Palestinians in to be gassed to death?
Your comparison with WW2 is crap.