Emmeran wrote:

Dmtdust wrote:

Emmeran wrote:

And that, boys and girls, is what happens if you have a crack or air pocket in your solid propellant.

And we can justify the deaths of nearly 400 children because of this?  Wow.

Please explain the math that is acceptable to you, let's say the rockets kill 10 people - how many can Isreal kill trying to stop the rockets?

Please show your work.

The problem with this is that the rockets usually don't kill anyone.

I love how every story about Israel, where there is a conflict, the story is "Israel Brutalized by Evil Bully while Minding it's own Business" and then, at the very end of the story, it says, "since the conflict began, Israel has lost 8 people to the fighting while (insert arab nation here) has lost 1,53....

Don't forget Celine Dion

Read the bio, and scout around...
http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/articl … 11&ar=2510
which results with this:  http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=8 … id=3510203

Last edited by Dmtdust (2009-01-23 13:34:24)

ptah13 wrote:

The problem with this is that the rockets usually don't kill anyone.

I love how every story about Israel, where there is a conflict, the story is "Israel Brutalized by Evil Bully while Minding it's own Business" and then, at the very end of the story, it says, "since the conflict began, Israel has lost 8 people to the fighting while (insert arab nation here) has lost 1,53....

I guess usually doesn't count unless it is you or yours getting killed; this isn't a case of running up the score kids - this is two organizations at war.  And one of these organizations has, as the first article in its charter, based it's existance on destroying the other.

What JeZeus sed.

I don't know about that; the complete destruction of the Zionist Entity is fully justifiable.

Emmeran wrote:

I fully agree - the side that has declared the only resolution is the complete destruction of the other is completely at fault.

That would be both sides, actually.

I have to say, if it were the Palestinians being the bully's, my reaction would be exactly the same.

Emmeran wrote:

orangeplus wrote:

Emmeran wrote:

I fully agree - the side that has declared the only resolution is the complete destruction of the other is completely at fault.

That would be both sides, actually.

Ok, then they both suck.

Let's kick them both out and give the land to our illegal immigrants.

No, the Mohawks!

I was surprised to learn that Israel censors military info and even banned international reporters from conflict areas. Here is an underground site called Israeli Uncensored News http://samsonblinded.org/news which runs some very odd reports.

Graphic pictures of the attack on Gaza.

Seriously, some are pretty bad, so if you blanch at the sight of people who have been blowed up good, just save yourself the bile.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf … e21869.htm

The Final Solution is a No-State Solution

By William Bowles

January 31, 2009 "Creative -I" -- - It was either in 1941 or maybe 1942 that the Nazis
implemented the 'Final Solution', the extermination of all 'non-Aryan' peoples that
included not only the Jews but also the Roma and the Serbs. So the term Holocaust
is not copyright © the Jewish 'race' in spite of their appropriation of the Upper case.

The numbers are not important, let the historians and researchers argue over
whether it was five or six million Jews or whether it was half-a-million or two million
Roma who 'went up the chimney'[1] (I don't have a number for the Serbs, but
perhaps a million died at the hands of the Croatian Ustase, the local Nazis in the then
Yugoslavia, as well as at the hands of German Nazi occupiers).

What is important about the 'Final Solution' is that it was a state-sponsored project to
not only entirely eradicate 'non-Aryans' but to erase all traces of their existence; their
history, their cultures and languages, what today we call genocide. An apt lesson for
the creation of the state of Israel, that for its creation, also required the total removal
of all things non-Jewish.

The parallels with the Nazi state are so obvious yet not alluded to at all in the current
tragedy of the Palestinian people, but Eretz (Greater) Israel flows from the same
source, the imperial urge to expand and subdue, to exterminate all that is non
'Jewish' in the land that is Palestine.

And it doesn't require much digging around in the history books to find that the
Zionist founders of Israel drew much of their 'inspiration' from Nazi ideology in the
1930s.

    "Zionism convicts itself. On June 21, 1933, the German Zionist Federation sent a
secret memorandum to the Nazis:

        "Zionism has no illusions about the difficulty of the Jewish condition, which
consists above all in an abnormal occupational pattern and in the fault of an
intellectual and moral posture not rooted in one's own tradition. Zionism recognized
decades ago that as a result of the assimilationist trend, symptoms of deterioration
were bound to appear, which it seeks to overcome by carrying out its challenge to
transform Jewish life completely.

        "It is our opinion that an answer to the Jewish question truly satisfying to the
national state can be brought about only with the collaboration of the Jewish
movement that aims at a social, cultural and moral renewal of Jewry--indeed, that
such a national renewal must first create the decisive social and spiritual premises for
all solutions.

        "Zionism believes that a rebirth of national life, such as is occurring in German
life through adhesion to Christian and national values, must also take place in the
Jewish national group. For the Jew, too, origin, religion, community of fate and
group consciousness must be of decisive significance in the shaping of his life. This
means that the egotistic individualism which arose in the liberal era must be
overcome by public spiritedness and by willingness to accept responsibility."

More at the Site...

Ahahahahahahaha!!!!!
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0204/p06s01-wome.html

UN admits it lied about attack on school

hmmmmm

tojo2000 wrote:

Emmeran wrote:

UN admits it lied about attack on school

hmmmmm

Emmeran lies about content of news story.

True, what difference does it make if the genocide was committed inside the building or on the front porch?

tojo2000 wrote:

fnord wrote:

tojo2000 wrote:

Emmeran lies about content of news story.

True, what difference does it make if the genocide was committed inside the building or on the front porch?

No, I was referring to the fact that nobody lied.  Basically there was a typo or misreading of the original communication saying a bomb dropped on the school (as opposed to what actually happened, a bomb dropped next to the school).  The UN complained about it, and then Israel admitted it, saying it was an error, and the bomb was supposed to drop next to the school.   Since Israel imposed a complete news blackout, the only source to go on was the original one and the IDF, which had admitted hitting the school.  Now we find out the original message was in error.  That's not the same thing as lying about the bombing at all.

I believe Articles 2 & 3 apply here.

Geneva Convention wrote:

Annex to the Convention
REGULATIONS RESPECTING THE LAWS AND CUSTOMS
OF WAR ON LAND
SECTION I
ON BELLIGERENTS
CHAPTER I

The Qualifications of Belligerents
Article 1.
The laws, rights, and duties of war apply not only to armies, but also to militia and volunteer corps fulfilling the following conditions:

To be commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

To have a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable at a distance;

To carry arms openly; and

To conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

In countries where militia or volunteer corps constitute the army, or form part of it, they are included under the denomination "army."

Art. 2.
The inhabitants of a territory which has not been occupied, who, on the approach of the enemy, spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading troops without having had time to organize themselves in accordance with Article 1, shall be regarded as belligerents if they carry arms openly and if they respect the laws and customs of war.

Art. 3.
The armed forces of the belligerent parties may consist of combatants and non-combatants. In the case of capture by the enemy, both have a right to be treated as prisoners of war.

tojo2000 wrote:

Emmeran wrote:

I believe Articles 2 & 3 apply here.

Geneva Convention wrote:

Annex to the Convention
REGULATIONS RESPECTING THE LAWS AND CUSTOMS
OF WAR ON LAND
SECTION I
ON BELLIGERENTS
CHAPTER I

The Qualifications of Belligerents
Article 1.
The laws, rights, and duties of war apply not only to armies, but also to militia and volunteer corps fulfilling the following conditions:

To be commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

To have a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable at a distance;

To carry arms openly; and

To conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

In countries where militia or volunteer corps constitute the army, or form part of it, they are included under the denomination "army."

Art. 2.
The inhabitants of a territory which has not been occupied, who, on the approach of the enemy, spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading troops without having had time to organize themselves in accordance with Article 1, shall be regarded as belligerents if they carry arms openly and if they respect the laws and customs of war.

Art. 3.
The armed forces of the belligerent parties may consist of combatants and non-combatants. In the case of capture by the enemy, both have a right to be treated as prisoners of war.

I would probably say that it is relevant to the conflict, but I don't see what it has to do with whether or not the UN lied about having their school bombed.  Or maybe you intended to respond to fnord.

(BTW, I don't think you were actually trying to trick us, I was just trying to spin the spin.)

That was a nice spin btw.

I'm just pointing out that with the exception that Hamas isn't a Geneva Convention signee this conflict has followed the letter of the law.  The inhabitants of Gaza will be determined to be beligerents which means Israel acted as it was entitled to.

Of course the lawyers will argue and haggle every angle of this as they have cause or money but at the end of the day it will be proven out the Israel did their homework.

BTW:  Hamas is being investigated for war crimes also in relation to their rocket fire.

Emmeran wrote:

I don't believe the typo story for a second, the UN has chosen a side here to thumb their noses at us.  This I believe would be more examples of how badly Bush fucked us.

I suppose you can choose not to believe it, but it was credible enough that the IDF admitted that they had done it, and they're not exactly the types to fall on their swords at the drop of a hat (and other fine metaphors).

Israeli Spokesman Says We Control Stupid Americans


"Another Israeli spokeswoman, Tzipora Menache, stated that she was not worried about negative ramifications the Israeli onslaught on Gaza might have on the way the Obama administration would view Israel. She said 'You know very well, and the stupid Americans know equally well, that we control their government, irrespective of who sits in the White House. You see, I know it and you know it that no American president can be in a position to challenge us even if we do the unthinkable. What can they (Americans) do to us? We control congress, we control the media, we control show biz, and we control everything in America. In America you can criticize God, but you can't criticize Israel."