Video taken of settlers shooting @ palestinians while soldiers stand by.


Quote:

An Israeli human rights group has released a video that appears to show Israeli soldiers standing by while Jewish settlers open fire on stone-throwing Palestinian protesters in the West Bank, wounding one of them, reports the BBC's Rupert Wingfield Hayes. It is the sort of incident that we often hear about, but almost never get to see. This time, thanks to B'Tselem, we have graphic video evidence of what happened. The picture the videos paint is disturbing. It appears to show Jewish settler youths attacking a Palestinian village; later heavily armed Jewish settlers shooting at, and wounding, a Palestinian man, and most disturbing of all, Israeli soldiers standing by and doing nothing to prevent the shooting. Continue reading the main story “Start Quote     It is the Israeli military's responsibility to protect all civilians from violence, not to favour one population at the expense of another” End Quote Jessica Montel B'Tselem The incident happened on Saturday afternoon just outside the Palestinian village of Asira al-Qubliya. In the first video a large number of young men from the nearby Jewish settlement of Yitzhar can be seen descending a mountainside towards the Palestinian village. The young settlers can be distinguished by the white cloths wound tightly around their heads. As the settlers approach the village, young Palestinian men from Asira al-Qubliya can be seen coming out to confront them. One Palestinian man runs towards them up the hill. He throws a rock at the approaching men, who reply in kind. One important detail is that, at this stage, there is no sign of any burning fields. Video from the human rights group, B'Tselem, appears to show young settlers descend a mountainside to attack the Palestinian village of Asira al-Qubliya In the second video the scene has changed. A group of men in white T-shirts, carrying assault rifles, is standing just outside the village. These are older settlers from Yitzhar. The fields behind them are now burning. A group of Israeli soldiers enters the scene from the right. The Palestinian youths start throwing stones at the soldiers and the armed settlers. Two of the armed settlers aim at one Palestinian youth just metres away and open fire. He falls down behind a rock wall. As the settlers retreat other Palestinian villagers rush in to drag the injured man away. He has been shot in the side of the head. Fortunately, the wound is not serious. Video from the human rights group, B'Tselem, appears to show Israeli soldiers standing by while settlers open fire on stone-throwing Palestinian protesters The third video shows the same scene from a different angle. This time a third armed settler, armed with a handgun rather than a rifle, can be seen taking aim and shooting at the Palestinian youths. Standing right beside him as he does so are two Israeli army soldiers, who make no attempt to stop him. In this video the injured man can be seen more clearly, blood pouring from the side of his head. As he is carried back to the village the other young Palestinian men shout in defiance. Video from the human rights group, B'Tselem, appears to show an armed settler taking aim at the Palestinian youths In a telephone interview with the BBC a spokesman for the Yitzhar settlement, Avraham Binyamin, claimed the incident had been started by the Palestinian villagers who, he said, had deliberately set fire to their own land in order to try and burn down the Jewish settlement. Continue reading the main story “Start Quote     Once [the settlers] arrived on the scene they were attacked by hundreds of Arab rioters hurling rocks at them” End Quote Avraham Binyamin Spokesman for Yitzhar settlement "We know for years a phenomenon that we call 'arson terror'," he said. "This year it is the third consecutive Saturday that Arabs set fire with the aim that the fire would reach homes in Yitzhar as it did in the past." He said the settlers had gone down the hill to try and extinguish the fire, and that was when the confrontation with the Palestinians began. "Once they arrived on the scene they were attacked by hundreds of Arab rioters hurling rocks at them," he said. "The fire was already on when the young men came down from Yitzhar." But the video shows that there was no fire burning when the young settlers came down the hill. It's impossible to tell from the videos who started the fire. But the villagers of Asira al-Qubliya point out that it was their own fields that were burned, and that the fire was much closer to their own village than to the Jewish settlement. Investigation "Sometimes twice a week the settlers come down and start attacking us and damaging our farms," says Fathi Nijem Asayrah, the father of the young man shot in the side of the head in Saturday's incident. Continue reading the main story “Start Quote     The settler who shot my son did it right next to a soldier, but he did nothing to intervene” End Quote Fathi Nijem Asayrah Father of injured Palestinian Sitting beside his son's hospital bed, he is angry at the settlers, but even more angry at the soldiers. "The settler who shot my son did it right next to a soldier, but he did nothing to intervene." It is this fact, clearly visible in the videos, that has most disturbed B'Tselem. "It is the Israeli military's responsibility to protect all civilians from violence, not to favour one population at the expense of another," says its spokesperson Jessica Montel. "What we saw again on Saturday is that the Israeli military did not intervene even when the settlers began shooting." The Israeli military meanwhile has released a statement. "During the confrontation, live fire was used," it said. "The incident is currently being investigated by the division commander. It appears that the video in question does not reflect the incident in its entirety."

Spot

Its funny to hear them say they try and stop settlers as well as Palestinians.
Ok you may try and 'stop' them but kindly talking to someone for something you would should another person for is just a great example of a terrorist regime.

Quote:

Terrorism is the systematic use of terror, especially as a means of coercion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism

falah wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 9:53am:

Quote: Terrorism is the systematic use of terror, especially as a means of coercion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism

Sorry falah but what a word actually means is not important to using a word for people on this site.

Let me tell you of personal experience spot of borg, you know why because since I have been in Australia since January I can realise how far away this is so what happens is you read stories from Israel and so you believe everything.

March, 2008 when I am in national service post to Hebron region.
Me and my 2 comrades is called to disturbance.

I arrive and Immediate surrounded from Palestinian women screaming to me that their children is down the hill but can not come to the house because settlers is firing gunfire across the streets and also one boy he has received small wound from stones cracked from gun fire.

I say to her to calm down and I will see.

I call in Hebrew to the settlers stop firing and take the children to the Palestinians. I rescue situation.

But you know what I also do?
I go to top of hill where is the settlers and tell them to behave.
I tell them is unacceptable and if we are called back today we are coming back and make arrests next time.
Settlers apologise to me.

I have settlers stop shooting I have Palestinians in their section and I give out warning.

I get no thanks. I am told by Palestinian woman "see how you let them do it. See how you don't stop them?"
See what I mean? She is wrong. I did stop them, I did make them safe.
But look how the story can read.

Know the real happenings my friend.

These kids don't know a thing about war, Avram. They think it's like a video game.

It's always sticky, messy and complicated. Sometimes just picking the enemy is impossible. And the enemy/friendly has family and lives in a community. They're all potential enemies.

I'll say this much: you enter a war to defend yourself or your country. You don't bugger about with people who will die to defend themselves - who will send their kids to die for their little patch of earth.

If I was Israel, Avram, I'd give a little to get a little.

Yes I know. There must be agreement but if they fire rockets they must always know we are firing back.
In west bank we army were also police so you can not go in shooting everything. You must make judgements, talk to people but only when you know your comrade he is covering your back and periphery vision. You know they try to bring out soldiers to line of sniper fire particularly Gaza border.

Avram.

Thankyou for sharing but I have gotten most of my information about whats going on from you yourself. You have told me that israel issues court orders to bulldoze homes in gaza. You wouldn't tell me what gives those "israeli" courts the right to do that since those houses are not israeli.

You have also told me that rachel corrie deserved what she got because she was there in front of the bulldozer. In any other country that I know of if someone was standing in front of a bulldozer then authorities would be called to remove them before proceeding and murder wouldn't be allowed.

Maybe you havent been the one to drive a bulldozer. That is fair enough. Do you @ least have any compassion for those that are hard done by and killed etc? Those that are displaced from their homes?

SOB

Karnal wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 1:49pm:

These kids don't know a thing about war, Avram. They think it's like a video game. It's always sticky, messy and complicated. Sometimes just picking the enemy is impossible. And the enemy/friendly has family and lives in a community. They're all potential enemies. I'll say this much: you enter a war to defend yourself or your country. You don't bugger about with people who will die to defend themselves - who will send their kids to die for their little patch of earth. If I was Israel, Avram, I'd give a little to get a little.

Its pretty obvious that ppl in homes eating their dinner are the enemy isnt it?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 2:58pm:

Karnal wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 1:49pm: These kids don't know a thing about war, Avram. They think it's like a video game. It's always sticky, messy and complicated. Sometimes just picking the enemy is impossible. And the enemy/friendly has family and lives in a community. They're all potential enemies. I'll say this much: you enter a war to defend yourself or your country. You don't bugger about with people who will die to defend themselves - who will send their kids to die for their little patch of earth. If I was Israel, Avram, I'd give a little to get a little. Its pretty obvious that ppl in homes eating their dinner are the enemy isnt it? SOB

Mate, I've got plenty of enemies who tuck into their meat and two veg after they've come back from the pub.

You can't discriminate.

all my enemies are so hard they dont even bother going home they get their chicken parmies right at the pub

JC Denton wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 3:16pm:

all my enemies are so hard they dont even bother going home they get their chicken parmies right at the pub

all my enemies are dead.

... wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 3:17pm:

JC Denton wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 3:16pm: all my enemies are so hard they dont even bother going home they get their chicken parmies right at the pub all my enemies are dead.

My enemies aren't even enemies.

i just kill people for fun

JC Denton wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 3:45pm:

i just kill people for fun

I encourage them to breed.

Only people huh? 

I kill bears, crocodiles, rhinos and lions for fun, using nothing but my open palms.

... wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 3:58pm:

Only people huh?  I kill bears, crocodiles, rhinos and lions for fun, using nothing but my open palms.

Chuck?

Karnal wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 3:50pm:

JC Denton wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 3:45pm: i just kill people for fun I encourage them to breed.

they breed with me

then i kill them

throw darts at their babies

and kill them again

JC Denton wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 4:36pm:

Karnal wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 3:50pm: JC Denton wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 3:45pm: i just kill people for fun I encourage them to breed. they breed with me then i kill them throw darts at their babies and kill them again

I control them so they can only breed with certain types.

You're out.

do it yourself eugenics kit only $9.99

I get a cheaper deal. I buy mine in bulk.

theres no galtonmart where i live yet tho

I do special price for you my frien

... wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 4:46pm:

I do special price for you my frien

No, thank you. I buy my population control kits from reputable suppliers, PB. They advertise in Punch.

Shurely shome mishtake.

is your lucky day sugar boy.

you buy you buy?

... wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 4:51pm:

is your lucky day sugar boy. you buy you buy?

Very good. Sir Reggie once had some poor chap like you at the Moscow Embassy. Man by the name of Mustapha Kunt.

Couldn't make it up, could you?

... wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 3:17pm:

JC Denton wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 3:16pm: all my enemies are so hard they dont even bother going home they get their chicken parmies right at the pub all my enemies are dead.

Oh no I'm not  ;D

Grey wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 4:58pm:

... wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 3:17pm: JC Denton wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 3:16pm: all my enemies are so hard they dont even bother going home they get their chicken parmies right at the pub all my enemies are dead. Oh no I'm not  ;D

You sure mate?  you sure look it...

---

... wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 5:01pm:

Grey wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 4:58pm: ... wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 3:17pm: JC Denton wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 3:16pm: all my enemies are so hard they dont even bother going home they get their chicken parmies right at the pub all my enemies are dead. Oh no I'm not  ;D You sure mate?  you sure look it...

That mate, is the picture of a hardman. You aint used to geezers that hard. That's what they mean by hard left.

Grey wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 5:08pm:

... wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 5:01pm: Grey wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 4:58pm: ... wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 3:17pm: JC Denton wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 3:16pm: all my enemies are so hard they dont even bother going home they get their chicken parmies right at the pub all my enemies are dead. Oh no I'm not  ;D You sure mate?  you sure look it... That mate, is the picture of a hardman. You aint used to geezers that hard. That's what they mean by hard left.

Yeah, credit where credit is due.  Death himself has been trying to get ya since the late 17th century and you're still here.

greys so old hes older than his mum

... wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 5:01pm:

Grey wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 4:58pm: ... wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 3:17pm: JC Denton wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 3:16pm: all my enemies are so hard they dont even bother going home they get their chicken parmies right at the pub all my enemies are dead. Oh no I'm not  ;D You sure mate?  you sure look it...

Who is this man?

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 7:41pm:

... wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 5:01pm: Grey wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 4:58pm: ... wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 3:17pm: JC Denton wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 3:16pm: all my enemies are so hard they dont even bother going home they get their chicken parmies right at the pub all my enemies are dead. Oh no I'm not  ;D You sure mate?  you sure look it... Who is this man?

Don't tell 'im, he'll set the settlers on me :-)

grey is wise - i'd do what he says

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 2:57pm:

Avram. Thankyou for sharing but I have gotten most of my information about whats going on from you yourself. You have told me that israel issues court orders to bulldoze homes in gaza. You wouldn't tell me what gives those "israeli" courts the right to do that since those houses are not israeli. You have also told me that rachel corrie deserved what she got because she was there in front of the bulldozer. In any other country that I know of if someone was standing in front of a bulldozer then authorities would be called to remove them before proceeding and murder wouldn't be allowed. Maybe you havent been the one to drive a bulldozer. That is fair enough. Do you @ least have any compassion for those that are hard done by and killed etc? Those that are displaced from their homes? SOB

No. No homes which are bulldoze by court order are in Gaza.
Israel has voluntary remove from Gaza and all control is Palestinian.

Homes removed are in West Bank which is technically under Israeli military control and court does have authority to issue order.

Court has authority to do anything. It is the way it is.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 8:46pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 2:57pm: Avram. Thankyou for sharing but I have gotten most of my information about whats going on from you yourself. You have told me that israel issues court orders to bulldoze homes in gaza. You wouldn't tell me what gives those "israeli" courts the right to do that since those houses are not israeli. You have also told me that rachel corrie deserved what she got because she was there in front of the bulldozer. In any other country that I know of if someone was standing in front of a bulldozer then authorities would be called to remove them before proceeding and murder wouldn't be allowed. Maybe you havent been the one to drive a bulldozer. That is fair enough. Do you @ least have any compassion for those that are hard done by and killed etc? Those that are displaced from their homes? SOB No. No homes which are bulldoze by court order are in Gaza. Israel has voluntary remove from Gaza and all control is Palestinian. Homes removed are in West Bank which is technically under Israeli military control and court does have authority to issue order.

Ok. I meant to say west bank and gaza but supposedly would have been wrong there too.

Anyway people live on the west bank. They have homes there. The land is theirs. What right have you to take it under the guise of "security"? If you didnt keep bulldozing their wells and roads and stuff they wouldn't be so angry with you. Well in theory. I think now that even if you stopped bothering them @ all they will remain angry and so would I.

Avram do you feel any compassion for the families in those homes? You say you were in the military did you participate in any of the raids where they had rocks and you had guns?

SOB

Too bad they didn't use bulldozers in the holocaust.
Under court permission tho of course.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 9:44am:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 8:46pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 2:57pm: Avram. Thankyou for sharing but I have gotten most of my information about whats going on from you yourself. You have told me that israel issues court orders to bulldoze homes in gaza. You wouldn't tell me what gives those "israeli" courts the right to do that since those houses are not israeli. You have also told me that rachel corrie deserved what she got because she was there in front of the bulldozer. In any other country that I know of if someone was standing in front of a bulldozer then authorities would be called to remove them before proceeding and murder wouldn't be allowed. Maybe you havent been the one to drive a bulldozer. That is fair enough. Do you @ least have any compassion for those that are hard done by and killed etc? Those that are displaced from their homes? SOB No. No homes which are bulldoze by court order are in Gaza. Israel has voluntary remove from Gaza and all control is Palestinian. Homes removed are in West Bank which is technically under Israeli military control and court does have authority to issue order. Ok. I meant to say west bank and gaza but supposedly would have been wrong there too. Anyway people live on the west bank. They have homes there. The land is theirs. What right have you to take it under the guise of "security"? If you didnt keep bulldozing their wells and roads and stuff they wouldn't be so angry with you. Well in theory. I think now that even if you stopped bothering them @ all they will remain angry and so would I. Avram do you feel any compassion for the families in those homes? You say you were in the military did you participate in any of the raids where they had rocks and you had guns? SOB

My postings were all over west bank, golan. In the border patrol I have faced Palestinians throwing rocks at me yes.
The raids I was in was Gaza that was rocks, gunfire, grenades all of this faced.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 24^th, 2012 at 7:11pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 24th, 2012 at 9:44am: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 8:46pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 23rd, 2012 at 2:57pm: Avram. Thankyou for sharing but I have gotten most of my information about whats going on from you yourself. You have told me that israel issues court orders to bulldoze homes in gaza. You wouldn't tell me what gives those "israeli" courts the right to do that since those houses are not israeli. You have also told me that rachel corrie deserved what she got because she was there in front of the bulldozer. In any other country that I know of if someone was standing in front of a bulldozer then authorities would be called to remove them before proceeding and murder wouldn't be allowed. Maybe you havent been the one to drive a bulldozer. That is fair enough. Do you @ least have any compassion for those that are hard done by and killed etc? Those that are displaced from their homes? SOB No. No homes which are bulldoze by court order are in Gaza. Israel has voluntary remove from Gaza and all control is Palestinian. Homes removed are in West Bank which is technically under Israeli military control and court does have authority to issue order. Ok. I meant to say west bank and gaza but supposedly would have been wrong there too. Anyway people live on the west bank. They have homes there. The land is theirs. What right have you to take it under the guise of "security"? If you didnt keep bulldozing their wells and roads and stuff they wouldn't be so angry with you. Well in theory. I think now that even if you stopped bothering them @ all they will remain angry and so would I. Avram do you feel any compassion for the families in those homes? You say you were in the military did you participate in any of the raids where they had rocks and you had guns? SOB My postings were all over west bank, golan. In the border patrol I have faced Palestinians throwing rocks at me yes. The raids I was in was Gaza that was rocks, gunfire, grenades all of this faced.

How many children did you kill?

SOB

0.

What did you do? You said you raided gaza - who did you kill? did you blow up houses with ppl in them? Oh and why did you raid them?

SOB

Mate you might want to check your history.

The Israelis went into Gaza in 2008 because Hamas had fired 300 rockets into their country in the space of a weekend.

Rockets with no guidance attached at all, so they could have hit anything whatsoever - but who cares as long as its Jewish right?

Why did Avram go in?
Mate, because he was told to. That's what happens when you're in the army.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 11:38am:

Mate you might want to check your history. The Israelis went into Gaza in 2008 because Hamas had fired 300 rockets into their country in the space of a weekend. Rockets with no guidance attached at all, so they could have hit anything whatsoever - but who cares as long as its Jewish right? Why did Avram go in? Mate, because he was told to. That's what happens when you're in the army.

So if they had guidance and aimed for military targets but there were innocent people killed anyway it wouldn't matter?
Why do you talk about 2008 like it was the first time anything ever happened between them?

The question was why he went into Gaza.

Avram went in Cast Lead - which was in 2008.
He personally went in, because he was told to go in by the IDF command.
The IDF went in to Gaza in response to Hamas firing hundreds of missiles at their towns.

That's the answer, it ain't hard.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 11:41am:

The question was why he went into Gaza. Avram went in Cast Lead - which was in 2008. He personally went in, because he was told to go in by the IDF command. The IDF went in to Gaza in response to Hamas firing hundreds of missiles at their towns. That's the answer, it ain't hard.

And for that we hung nazis, so I suggest the gas chamber

Nazis were hung for committing atrocities and murdering millions of women and children.

Ordinary German Wehrmacht soldiers were not hung or even sentenced - they were serving soldiers in a war.

Much like Avram - a serving soldier in the IDF told to go in for an Operation to protect his country from attack.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 11:45am:

Nazis were hung for committing atrocities and murdering millions of women and children. Ordinary German Wehrmacht soldiers were not hung or even sentenced - they were serving soldiers in a war. Much like Avram - a serving soldier in the IDF told to go in for an Operation to protect his country from attack.

But it would have been ok if they said they were aiming for military targets?

Nazis were hung for marching Jews into gas chambers and killing them.

They never were or ever had been military targets.

You don't aim for a military target by herding millions of people into trains and sending them to be gassed in camps.

Collateral damage of civilians being killed (often because the opponent has placed their rocket launchers in residental zones knowing full well the IAF are going to blow the sh*t out of it in response) - is a completely different story.

Why do you think the United States vetoed the latest resolution on this subject?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 11:38am:

Mate you might want to check your history. The Israelis went into Gaza in 2008 because Hamas had fired 300 rockets into their country in the space of a weekend. Rockets with no guidance attached at all, so they could have hit anything whatsoever - but who cares as long as its Jewish right? Why did Avram go in? Mate, because he was told to. That's what happens when you're in the army.

I am asking him not you

SOB

Anyone with any sense can see though.

It's not a question he should even answer.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 11:45am:

Nazis were hung for committing atrocities and murdering millions of women and children. Ordinary German Wehrmacht soldiers were not hung or even sentenced - they were serving soldiers in a war. Much like Avram - a serving soldier in the IDF told to go in for an Operation to protect his country from attack.

Yes. I know. This is why I am asking him. I want to know what he went through and how he felt/feels about it. Which you do not know.

SOB

Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 11:49am:

Nazis were hung for marching Jews into gas chambers and killing them. They never were or ever had been military targets. You don't aim for a military target by herding millions of people into trains and sending them to be gassed in camps. Collateral damage of civilians being killed (often because the opponent has placed their rocket launchers in residental zones knowing full well the IAF are going to blow the sh*t out of it in response) - is a completely different story. Why do you think the United States vetoed the latest resolution on this subject?

You have evidence of gas chambers?

Sorry but any civilians who have died in Israel are just collateral damage.

Why would you state what the US does, clearly not a very trustworthy or legitimate figure.

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 11:53am:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 11:49am: Nazis were hung for marching Jews into gas chambers and killing them. They never were or ever had been military targets. You don't aim for a military target by herding millions of people into trains and sending them to be gassed in camps. Collateral damage of civilians being killed (often because the opponent has placed their rocket launchers in residental zones knowing full well the IAF are going to blow the sh*t out of it in response) - is a completely different story. Why do you think the United States vetoed the latest resolution on this subject? You have evidence of gas chambers? Sorry but any civilians who have died in Israel are just collateral damage. Why would you state what the US does, clearly not a very trustworthy or legitimate figure.

Are you on fking drugs as well as being a rabid anti-semite?
There was a holocaust with the death of millions of people you idiot.

Evidence?
I walked around Auschwitz myself, the evidence is in your fking face.

Millions of Jews were gassed by Nazis. That is why they were hung - and so they should have been too.

you heard him

millions of JEWS were gassed by the nazis

thats why those bastards got what was comin to 'em

Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 11:55am:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 11:53am: Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 11:49am: Nazis were hung for marching Jews into gas chambers and killing them. They never were or ever had been military targets. You don't aim for a military target by herding millions of people into trains and sending them to be gassed in camps. Collateral damage of civilians being killed (often because the opponent has placed their rocket launchers in residental zones knowing full well the IAF are going to blow the sh*t out of it in response) - is a completely different story. Why do you think the United States vetoed the latest resolution on this subject? You have evidence of gas chambers? Sorry but any civilians who have died in Israel are just collateral damage. Why would you state what the US does, clearly not a very trustworthy or legitimate figure. Are you on fking drugs as well as being a rabid anti-semite? There was a holocaust with the death of millions of people you idiot. Evidence? I walked around Auschwitz myself, the evidence is in your fking face. Millions of Jews were gassed by Nazis. That is why they were hung - and so they should have been too.

Even tho the supposed gas chambers were not capable of being used to gas people.
You have no evidence that people were gassed and the 6 million figure is insane when there is no evidence to back it up.

Stupid stupid comment.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:42am:

What did you do? You said you raided gaza - who did you kill? did you blow up houses with ppl in them? Oh and why did you raid them? SOB

Bump

SOB

We raided Gaza over period of days in operation cast lead.

I was one of first units into Gaza only 45 mins after end of air strikes.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 7:06pm:

We raided Gaza over period of days in operation cast lead. I was one of first units into Gaza only 45 mins after end of air strikes.

That doesnt answer my question. What I want to know is if you killed anyone or destroyed anyone's homes. How you felt about it if you did or witnessed it. What you think about it now.

SOB

Gaza is mostly large apartment blocks it is not little houses, very dense population.
Some parts I have damage myself on return of fire.

I am not direct responsible for apartments destroyed but there has been bad damage to some buildings by Israeli Air Force which I called with coordinates for strike support
How do I feel?

They were firing at us and trying to kill us.
We called in air force and pull back 200 meters and they did not know it was coming.
I have no bad feelings at all about it.

In cast lead Gaza has too large apartment buildings.
It is much too difficult and dangerous for us to go into the building.

So tactic is to draw fire for 30 mins understand the coordinates and section of Hamas fighters then call for F-15e to  attack from the air.

hamas started by mossad?

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/ZER403A.html

http://wearechangetv.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/oops.jpg

http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/images/2010/0221/0221-odu-netanyahu-hamas-commander-dubai-600/7432444-1-eng-US/0221-ODU-Netanyahu-hamas-commander-dubai-600_full_380.jpg

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 7:18pm:

Gaza is mostly large apartment blocks it is not little houses, very dense population. Some parts I have damage myself on return of fire. I am not direct responsible for apartments destroyed but there has been bad damage to some buildings by Israeli Air Force which I called with coordinates for strike support How do I feel? They were firing at us and trying to kill us. We called in air force and pull back 200 meters and they did not know it was coming..

Yes friends, it is so. I was in building. It was complete suprise.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 11:49am:

Nazis were hung for marching Jews into gas chambers and killing them. They never were or ever had been military targets. You don't aim for a military target by herding millions of people into trains and sending them to be gassed in camps. Collateral damage of civilians being killed (often because the opponent has placed their rocket launchers in residental zones knowing full well the IAF are going to blow the sh*t out of it in response) - is a completely different story. Why do you think the United States vetoed the latest resolution on this subject?

You just reduced the Argument to Nazis...you  lose.  Another Godwin.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 7:18pm:

Gaza is mostly large apartment blocks it is not little houses, very dense population. Some parts I have damage myself on return of fire. I am not direct responsible for apartments destroyed but there has been bad damage to some buildings by Israeli Air Force which I called with coordinates for strike support How do I feel? They were firing at us and trying to kill us. We called in air force and pull back 200 meters and they did not know it was coming. I have no bad feelings at all about it.

So why is it ok for you to do it but terrorism when they do it?

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 7:01pm:

Stupid stupid comment.

Then you wouldn't have a problem proving me wrong

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 8:58pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 7:18pm: Gaza is mostly large apartment blocks it is not little houses, very dense population. Some parts I have damage myself on return of fire. I am not direct responsible for apartments destroyed but there has been bad damage to some buildings by Israeli Air Force which I called with coordinates for strike support How do I feel? They were firing at us and trying to kill us. We called in air force and pull back 200 meters and they did not know it was coming. I have no bad feelings at all about it. So why is it ok for you to do it but terrorism when they do it?

Because they start it. The Jews hit back.

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 8:59pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 7:01pm: Stupid stupid comment. Then you wouldn't have a problem proving me wrong

Well, you are stupid and of bad faith as a general policy. You couldn't possibly be right.

Soren wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:00pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 8:58pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 7:18pm: Gaza is mostly large apartment blocks it is not little houses, very dense population. Some parts I have damage myself on return of fire. I am not direct responsible for apartments destroyed but there has been bad damage to some buildings by Israeli Air Force which I called with coordinates for strike support How do I feel? They were firing at us and trying to kill us. We called in air force and pull back 200 meters and they did not know it was coming. I have no bad feelings at all about it. So why is it ok for you to do it but terrorism when they do it? Because they start it. The Jews hit back.

When did they start it?


Soren wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:02pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 8:59pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 7:01pm: Stupid stupid comment. Then you wouldn't have a problem proving me wrong Well, you are stupid and of bad faith as a general policy. You couldn't possibly be right.

Wow Soren, congratulations for once again not actually being able to legitimately respond to my claims but still gloat as if you have proven me wrong.
What a a joke you are and it is comforting to know your generation will be dead soon.

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:05pm:

When did they start it?

They started it on the day Israel came into existence.

Have a look at the history of the last few centuries and see how many countries have come into existence and see ho many have been subjected to sch sustained attacks from the day of their inceptions and are still under relentless attack.

You will see that what is unique about Israel among all the other countries that have come into being in that period is that it is NOT that it is Jewish but that it is the ONLY non Muslim country in a previously Muslim area.

The only problem is Islam. Islam is the sole, insurmountable obstacle to peace. Everywhere else, where Islam is not present, such a birth of a country has gone completely unremarked, by comparison.

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 8:59pm:

Wow Soren, congratulations for once again not actually being able to legitimately respond to my claims but still gloat as if you have proven me wrong. What a a joke you are and it is comforting to know your generation will be dead soon.

I rest my case.

Stupid and of bad faith are correct.

Soren wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:17pm:

They started it on the day Israel came into existence. Have a look at the history of the last few centuries and see how many countries have come into existence and see ho many have been subjected to sch sustained attacks from the day of their inceptions and are still under relentless attack. You will see that what is unique about Israel among all the other countries that have come into being in that period is that it is NOT that it is Jewish but that it is the ONLY non Muslim country in a previously Muslim area. The only problem is Islam. Islam is the sole, insurmountable obstacle to peace. Everywhere else, where Islam is not present, such a birth of a country has gone completely unremarked, by comparison.

So just to clarify, if someone invaded Australia and starting killing innocent Australians we would be the ones in the wrong for defending ourselves?
I don't claim that there is other violence in the world but you cant complain about one person doing it when you ignore another doing exactly the same thing. Israel is a hypocritical, lying and dangerous terrorist state and if you actually cared about people like you may claim you would care WHAT people do not WHO is doing it.
The Jewish are unstable and dangerous religious nutjobs who are putting the safety of the world at risk. There track records proves them to be far worse then Islam.

Soren wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:19pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 8:59pm: Wow Soren, congratulations for once again not actually being able to legitimately respond to my claims but still gloat as if you have proven me wrong. What a a joke you are and it is comforting to know your generation will be dead soon. I rest my case. Stupid and of bad faith are correct.

So stupid its not possible for you to prove me wrong.

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 8:58pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 7:18pm: Gaza is mostly large apartment blocks it is not little houses, very dense population. Some parts I have damage myself on return of fire. I am not direct responsible for apartments destroyed but there has been bad damage to some buildings by Israeli Air Force which I called with coordinates for strike support How do I feel? They were firing at us and trying to kill us. We called in air force and pull back 200 meters and they did not know it was coming. I have no bad feelings at all about it. So why is it ok for you to do it but terrorism when they do it?

We are not attacking innocent people, we are responding to attacks and removing the threat.
You obviously do not understand the difference.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:23pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 8:58pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 7:18pm: Gaza is mostly large apartment blocks it is not little houses, very dense population. Some parts I have damage myself on return of fire. I am not direct responsible for apartments destroyed but there has been bad damage to some buildings by Israeli Air Force which I called with coordinates for strike support How do I feel? They were firing at us and trying to kill us. We called in air force and pull back 200 meters and they did not know it was coming. I have no bad feelings at all about it. So why is it ok for you to do it but terrorism when they do it? We are not attacking innocent people, we are responding to attacks and removing the threat. You obviously do not understand the difference.

Right except you are the ones who started it so their attack would always have been after yours making them the ones 'responding'.
Yes it is a bit hard to spot the difference in things around this subject.
Its ok for you to kill civilians, but not them. Nope cant spot the diff.

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:26pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 9:23pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 8:58pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 7:18pm: Gaza is mostly large apartment blocks it is not little houses, very dense population. Some parts I have damage myself on return of fire. I am not direct responsible for apartments destroyed but there has been bad damage to some buildings by Israeli Air Force which I called with coordinates for strike support How do I feel? They were firing at us and trying to kill us. We called in air force and pull back 200 meters and they did not know it was coming. I have no bad feelings at all about it. So why is it ok for you to do it but terrorism when they do it? We are not attacking innocent people, we are responding to attacks and removing the threat. You obviously do not understand the difference. Right except you are the ones who started it so their attack would always have been after yours making them the ones 'responding'. Yes it is a bit hard to spot the difference in things around this subject. Its ok for you to kill civilians, but not them. Nope cant spot the diff.

In the situation I gave - which is what I was asked - we did not attack civilians.
We came under heavy fire from apartment block east of gaza city and we called in air strike to remove the threat.

Not civilians - terrorists who attacked us as we come down the street.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:30pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 9:26pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 9:23pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 8:58pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 7:18pm: Gaza is mostly large apartment blocks it is not little houses, very dense population. Some parts I have damage myself on return of fire. I am not direct responsible for apartments destroyed but there has been bad damage to some buildings by Israeli Air Force which I called with coordinates for strike support How do I feel? They were firing at us and trying to kill us. We called in air force and pull back 200 meters and they did not know it was coming. I have no bad feelings at all about it. So why is it ok for you to do it but terrorism when they do it? We are not attacking innocent people, we are responding to attacks and removing the threat. You obviously do not understand the difference. Right except you are the ones who started it so their attack would always have been after yours making them the ones 'responding'. Yes it is a bit hard to spot the difference in things around this subject. Its ok for you to kill civilians, but not them. Nope cant spot the diff. In the situation I gave - which is what I was asked - we did not attack civilians. We came under heavy fire from apartment block east of gaza city and we called in air strike to remove the threat. Not civilians - terrorists who attacked us as we come down the street.

So there were no civilians in the apartment block?

we were responding to heavy fire and required air support.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:48pm:

we were responding to heavy fire and required air support.

So you fired on civilians?

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:49pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 9:48pm: we were responding to heavy fire and required air support. So you fired on civilians?

No.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:30pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 9:26pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 9:23pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 8:58pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 7:18pm: Gaza is mostly large apartment blocks it is not little houses, very dense population. Some parts I have damage myself on return of fire. I am not direct responsible for apartments destroyed but there has been bad damage to some buildings by Israeli Air Force which I called with coordinates for strike support How do I feel? They were firing at us and trying to kill us. We called in air force and pull back 200 meters and they did not know it was coming. I have no bad feelings at all about it. So why is it ok for you to do it but terrorism when they do it? We are not attacking innocent people, we are responding to attacks and removing the threat. You obviously do not understand the difference. Right except you are the ones who started it so their attack would always have been after yours making them the ones 'responding'. Yes it is a bit hard to spot the difference in things around this subject. Its ok for you to kill civilians, but not them. Nope cant spot the diff. In the situation I gave - which is what I was asked - we did not attack civilians. We came under heavy fire from apartment block east of gaza city and we called in air strike to remove the threat. Not civilians - terrorists who attacked us as we come down the street.

No - innocent terrorists. We walk down street first, nice day, minding our business.

You call in air strike to make a suprise.   

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:49pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 9:48pm: we were responding to heavy fire and required air support. So you fired on civilians?

How do YOU tell the difference between Arabs it's ok to fire on because they are shooting at you and Arabs it's not ok to fire on because they are merely shielding Arabs who are firing on you??

Your wisdom would be appreciated.

Is hard. With Israelis, it is ones in tank who fire at everything. They fire like a party of drunken sailor. 

Karnal wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 11:02pm:

Is hard. With Israelis, it is ones in tank who fire at everything. They fire like a party of drunken sailor.

In parts of Gaza - such as where I am talking - it is not possible to have tanks come through this zone.
Both too small streets and also that the Hamas terrorists have anti-tank launchers.

Much more safe to draw fire and then call in IAF.

Karnal wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 11:02pm:

Is hard. With Israelis, it is ones in tank who fire at everything. They fire like a party of drunken sailor.

Funny how they don't shoot at other Jews, only at Arabs with gunz. Must be racism. Or not drunken enough.
Or shome other mishtake.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 7:18pm:

Gaza is mostly large apartment blocks it is not little houses, very dense population. Some parts I have damage myself on return of fire. I am not direct responsible for apartments destroyed but there has been bad damage to some buildings by Israeli Air Force which I called with coordinates for strike support How do I feel? They were firing at us and trying to kill us. We called in air force and pull back 200 meters and they did not know it was coming. I have no bad feelings at all about it.

Why were they firing on you? Perhaps because you were coming through THEIR city with guns?

SOB

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 7:29pm:

In cast lead Gaza has too large apartment buildings. It is much too difficult and dangerous for us to go into the building. So tactic is to draw fire for 30 mins understand the coordinates and section of Hamas fighters then call for F-15e to  attack from the air.

You bombed 2 large apartment buildings from the air and you think you didnt kill any children? You dont feel any remorse @ destroying the homes of 100s of ppl in those apartment blocks?

SOB

Soren wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:00pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 8:58pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 7:18pm: Gaza is mostly large apartment blocks it is not little houses, very dense population. Some parts I have damage myself on return of fire. I am not direct responsible for apartments destroyed but there has been bad damage to some buildings by Israeli Air Force which I called with coordinates for strike support How do I feel? They were firing at us and trying to kill us. We called in air force and pull back 200 meters and they did not know it was coming. I have no bad feelings at all about it. So why is it ok for you to do it but terrorism when they do it? Because they start it. The Jews hit back.

Oh you mean like in freedivers completely obvious lying explanation?


Quote:

Borg, this requires a frank look at the evidence, not spin doctoring. Take this as an example: Country A attacks B on day X in history. 80 days later country B defends itself. 3 hours later country A launches yet another unprovoked attack. This time it takes B a bit longer to summon it's resources, but manages to respond in 130 days. 87 minutes later country A again launches another completely unprovoked attack. ...and so on

SOB

Soren wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:02pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 8:59pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 7:01pm: Stupid stupid comment. Then you wouldn't have a problem proving me wrong Well, you are stupid and of bad faith as a general policy. You couldn't possibly be right.

Yes you are a stupid woman.

SOB

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:23pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 8:58pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 7:18pm: Gaza is mostly large apartment blocks it is not little houses, very dense population. Some parts I have damage myself on return of fire. I am not direct responsible for apartments destroyed but there has been bad damage to some buildings by Israeli Air Force which I called with coordinates for strike support How do I feel? They were firing at us and trying to kill us. We called in air force and pull back 200 meters and they did not know it was coming. I have no bad feelings at all about it. So why is it ok for you to do it but terrorism when they do it? We are not attacking innocent people, we are responding to attacks and removing the threat. You obviously do not understand the difference.

You mean like freedivers attempt @ justification?


Quote:

Borg, this requires a frank look at the evidence, not spin doctoring. Take this as an example: Country A attacks B on day X in history. 80 days later country B defends itself. 3 hours later country A launches yet another unprovoked attack. This time it takes B a bit longer to summon it's resources, but manages to respond in 130 days. 87 minutes later country A again launches another completely unprovoked attack. ...and so on

SOB

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 9:30pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 9:26pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 9:23pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 8:58pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 7:18pm: Gaza is mostly large apartment blocks it is not little houses, very dense population. Some parts I have damage myself on return of fire. I am not direct responsible for apartments destroyed but there has been bad damage to some buildings by Israeli Air Force which I called with coordinates for strike support How do I feel? They were firing at us and trying to kill us. We called in air force and pull back 200 meters and they did not know it was coming. I have no bad feelings at all about it. So why is it ok for you to do it but terrorism when they do it? We are not attacking innocent people, we are responding to attacks and removing the threat. You obviously do not understand the difference. Right except you are the ones who started it so their attack would always have been after yours making them the ones 'responding'. Yes it is a bit hard to spot the difference in things around this subject. Its ok for you to kill civilians, but not them. Nope cant spot the diff. In the situation I gave - which is what I was asked - we did not attack civilians. We came under heavy fire from apartment block east of gaza city and we called in air strike to remove the threat. Not civilians - terrorists who attacked us as we come down the street.

What do you mean you didnt attack civilians? It was a large apartment complex!

Why were you coming down the street? Was it YOUR street to be coming down?

SOB

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 10:00pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 9:49pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 9:48pm: we were responding to heavy fire and required air support. So you fired on civilians? No.

Yes. You did. You struck 2 large apartment buildings from the sky. Are you telling us there were no civilians in there?

SOB

You ask me what I myself did.
I fired at terrorists who were firing to us and who threw grenades at us.
That's not terrorism from them?

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 9:53am:

You ask me what I myself did. I fired at terrorists who were firing to us and who threw grenades at us. That's not terrorism from them?

Well you were in their city werent you? Did you expect to go in and them not defend themselves from the incursion?

Yes I did ask what you yourself did. I wanted to know how you felt about it. You called for the air-strike you said. So it was your decision to bomb the 2 large apartment buildings?

SOB

The decision is Tel Aviv not us.
My comrade and I radio that heavy gunfire continue and give coordinates of buildings.
It is not our decision. We make the request for air strike and then it is approve or rejected.
We were told to pull back and F16 strike eagles were coming.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 10:27am:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26th, 2012 at 9:53am: You ask me what I myself did. I fired at terrorists who were firing to us and who threw grenades at us. That's not terrorism from them? Well you were in their city werent you? Did you expect to go in and them not defend themselves from the incursion? Yes I did ask what you yourself did. I wanted to know how you felt about it. You called for the air-strike you said. So it was your decision to bomb the 2 large apartment buildings? SOB

We were there to stop rocket attacks on Israel.
If they behave we would not come.
This was explained to the United States.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 10:33am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 26th, 2012 at 10:27am: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26th, 2012 at 9:53am: You ask me what I myself did. I fired at terrorists who were firing to us and who threw grenades at us. That's not terrorism from them? Well you were in their city werent you? Did you expect to go in and them not defend themselves from the incursion? Yes I did ask what you yourself did. I wanted to know how you felt about it. You called for the air-strike you said. So it was your decision to bomb the 2 large apartment buildings? SOB We were there to stop rocket attacks on Israel. If they behave we would not come. This was explained to the United States.

You were still invading them. Maybe you personally didnt kill innocent families and stuff but israel is responsible. Why should they lay down and let you kill them? That is what you mean by "behave" i am sure.

I dont care what the yanks say. I am trying to see if you have any compassion @ all for those your country oppresses.

West bank is not yours. A 2 state solution would have to give it back to the Palestinians or not but not have it occupied. Nobody is going to agree to have their country occupied by bullies.

SOB

Soren wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 10:45pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 9:49pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 9:48pm: we were responding to heavy fire and required air support. So you fired on civilians? How do YOU tell the difference between Arabs it's ok to fire on because they are shooting at you and Arabs it's not ok to fire on because they are merely shielding Arabs who are firing on you?? Your wisdom would be appreciated.

Then its ok for them to do the same to Israel.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25^th, 2012 at 11:13pm:

Karnal wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 11:02pm: Is hard. With Israelis, it is ones in tank who fire at everything. They fire like a party of drunken sailor.  In parts of Gaza - such as where I am talking - it is not possible to have tanks come through this zone. Both too small streets and also that the Hamas terrorists have anti-tank launchers. Much more safe to draw fire and then call in IAF.

Not much safe for peoples in buildings. Why you can't use tank?

Urban area. Narrow streets.

Instead you call planes to destroy whole neighbourhood with phosphorus bomb. Much safer.

Israel still uses Amerikan blitzkreig tactics from 1960s. Even Amerika no longer use this strategy. It must deal with guerilla tactics, light weapons, IEDs, suicide bomber. Also, war is now fought in media.

Israeli strategy cause high civilian deaths. This breeds more anger. Anger is not terrorism, it is war. Israel is not fighting terrorism, it is fighting a war. Each dead mother or child has a son, a brother, an uncle or father.

Israel is intoxicated by its Amerikan weapons and divine mission.

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 11:54am:

Soren wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 10:45pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 9:49pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 9:48pm: we were responding to heavy fire and required air support. So you fired on civilians? How do YOU tell the difference between Arabs it's ok to fire on because they are shooting at you and Arabs it's not ok to fire on because they are merely shielding Arabs who are firing on you?? Your wisdom would be appreciated. Then its ok for them to do the same to Israel.

Do the same? what same? There is no Jewish Hamas and Hezb'allah.

My friendy, before UN and Mother England gave Israel a state, there was.

Karnal wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 12:04pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 11:13pm: Karnal wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 11:02pm: Is hard. With Israelis, it is ones in tank who fire at everything. They fire like a party of drunken sailor.  In parts of Gaza - such as where I am talking - it is not possible to have tanks come through this zone. Both too small streets and also that the Hamas terrorists have anti-tank launchers. Much more safe to draw fire and then call in IAF. Not much safe for peoples in buildings. Why you can't use tank? Urban area. Narrow streets. Instead you call planes to destroy whole neighbourhood with phosphorus bomb. Much safer. Israel still uses Amerikan blitzkreig tactics from 1960s. Even Amerika no longer use this strategy. It must deal with guerilla tactics, light weapons, IEDs, suicide bomber. Also, war is now fought in media. Israeli strategy cause high civilian deaths. This breeds more anger. Anger is not terrorism, it is war. Israel is not fighting terrorism, it is fighting a war. Each dead mother or child has a son, a brother, an uncle or father. Israel is intoxicated by its Amerikan weapons and divine mission.

So what would you do different to me this time?
It was too dangerous and we had no cover fire.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 23^rd, 2012 at 1:27pm:

Let me tell you of personal experience spot of borg, you know why because since I have been in Australia since January I can realise how far away this is so what happens is you read stories from Israel and so you believe everything. March, 2008 when I am in national service post to Hebron region. Me and my 2 comrades is called to disturbance. I arrive and Immediate surrounded from Palestinian women screaming to me that their children is down the hill but can not come to the house because settlers is firing gunfire across the streets and also one boy he has received small wound from stones cracked from gun fire. I say to her to calm down and I will see. I call in Hebrew to the settlers stop firing and take the children to the Palestinians. I rescue situation. But you know what I also do? I go to top of hill where is the settlers and tell them to behave. I tell them is unacceptable and if we are called back today we are coming back and make arrests next time. Settlers apologise to me. I have settlers stop shooting I have Palestinians in their section and I give out warning. I get no thanks. I am told by Palestinian woman "see how you let them do it. See how you don't stop them?" See what I mean? She is wrong. I did stop them, I did make them safe. But look how the story can read. Know the real happenings my friend.

You see here we have the Zionist telling us that when settlers shoot at Palestinian children the correct response is to tell settlers not to be naughty.

Yet when a Palestinian resistance fighter fires on an invasion force from and apartment block the correct response is to call in an air strike on the apartment block.

The excuse for 'cast lead' which killed and made homeless thousands of innocent palestinians already suffering from a blockade. Is that resistance fighters were shooting primitive rockets into Israel. But these rockets didn't come from Gaza city. They came from just outside the Wall.

Why weren't air strikes called on the rocket launchers? They say because they move so fast. This is a lie. When these rockets are launched they leave a vapour trail pointing to the launch site, in unoccupied farm land just the other side of the Israelie wall. they could take out a launch vehicle there in seconds with an Apache.

The Israelis WANT the rockets. They rarely harm anybody, nobody was hurt by them in the months before 'Cast Lead'. They weren't launched by Hamas but by a radical splinter group. Acting with the same method and intention of radical splinter groups in Northern Ireland. They want conflict, you will always get a few idiots.

The Israeli response was to call down a blitzkreig on a civilian city. Then they wonder why they're called Nazis. Keh!

grey, avram = probably andrei hicks, or some other alt

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 2:25pm:

Karnal wrote on May 26th, 2012 at 12:04pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 11:13pm: Karnal wrote on May 25th, 2012 at 11:02pm: Is hard. With Israelis, it is ones in tank who fire at everything. They fire like a party of drunken sailor.  In parts of Gaza - such as where I am talking - it is not possible to have tanks come through this zone. Both too small streets and also that the Hamas terrorists have anti-tank launchers. Much more safe to draw fire and then call in IAF. Not much safe for peoples in buildings. Why you can't use tank? Urban area. Narrow streets. Instead you call planes to destroy whole neighbourhood with phosphorus bomb. Much safer. Israel still uses Amerikan blitzkreig tactics from 1960s. Even Amerika no longer use this strategy. It must deal with guerilla tactics, light weapons, IEDs, suicide bomber. Also, war is now fought in media. Israeli strategy cause high civilian deaths. This breeds more anger. Anger is not terrorism, it is war. Israel is not fighting terrorism, it is fighting a war. Each dead mother or child has a son, a brother, an uncle or father. Israel is intoxicated by its Amerikan weapons and divine mission. So what would you do different to me this time? It was too dangerous and we had no cover fire.

You can do nothing. You must join army, fight war.

Only very religious Jew can avoid the army service.

JC Denton wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 5:00pm:

grey, avram = probably andrei hicks, or some other alt

It really makes no difference, he's calling it like it is. Actually I think he's genuine. He talks the talk of most Israelis.

Grey wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 5:07pm:

JC Denton wrote on May 26th, 2012 at 5:00pm: grey, avram = probably andrei hicks, or some other alt It really makes no difference, he's calling it like it is. Actually I think he's genuine. He talks the talk of most Israelis.

Avram is avram. hicks is more insulting in manner.

I cant believe the yanks (and australia too!) support this terrorism. The israelis seem to want the palestinians to just lay down and die (behave).

Avram was in the military - he had to do what he was ordered. The problem seems to be that he thinks it is right. He did the right thing to go into gaza and call down an airstrike on 2 large apartment buildings. He actually seems to believe he was acting in self defense! This is very hard to understand.

Israel needs to be stopped. Obviously if what avram says is true then the 2 state solution isnt going to work. We are going to have to just withdraw all support for israels atrocities and maybe protect the palestinians.

SOB

I do have to point out though that I am totally disgusted by his attitude. Especially towards rachel corrie. It demonstrates that its not just the palestinians that these jews hate. They think they are gods chosen ppl and they can do whatever they want. This is also (i think) what the yanks etc think too that they are gods chosen so have to be allowed to do whatever they want. Its disgusting.

Avram you do realise you killed children and families in those apartments? Innocent ppl?

SOB

Karnal wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 2:04pm:

My friendy, before UN and Mother England gave Israel a state, there was.

And so Political Puppet and SOB were pro-Zionist then, yes?

There would be no settlers and no ongoing conflict if the Arabs had accepted Israel in 1948.

Israel in 1948 was even tinier than today.
If you were a reasonable Arab person you would have looked at the map and see the  Arab land area (13 million square kms, almost twice the size of Australia) and say, well, the Jews do have a claim to Judea and Samaria and it's only about 15 thousand sq Kms (a QUARTER of Tasmania and nut much less than the land area of Greater Sydney). We can work with them, thy are smart, they ill bring prosperity to the region. Let them have it.


They would have said precisely that if it was anyone but the Jews. For the Jews to have anything that was once fully controlled by Islam is just not something the Islamic mind can process.

There would not have been 1967 war leading to the Israeli occupation of Gaza and the West Bank or 1973 war and all the rest of it.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 5:24pm:

I do have to point out though that I am totally disgusted by his attitude. Especially towards rachel corrie. It demonstrates that its not just the palestinians that these jews hate. They think they are gods chosen ppl and they can do whatever they want. This is also (i think) what the yanks etc think too that they are gods chosen so have to be allowed to do whatever they want. Its disgusting. Avram you do realise you killed children and families in those apartments? Innocent ppl? SOB

I did not kill anyone innocent. That is fact.
I am telling you 100% honesty I was in group of 4 who come under heavy fire in Gaza City and we are very lucky to not be hurt. Gunfire was very surprising and we had no option.
Tanks would not fit down streets and we could not go ourselves as we had no cover.

So you tell me what other choice was open to us?

I like Australia but I realise in this 5 months you have no idea what life is in Israel conflict .

Soren wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 5:28pm:

Karnal wrote on May 26th, 2012 at 2:04pm: My friendy, before UN and Mother England gave Israel a state, there was. And so Political Puppet and SOB were pro-Zionist then, yes?

Yes. In 1946 these men were Zionists.

Grey the rocket launches from Gaza are from mobile units. There is 30 min response time to raise F-16 strike craft for response.
There is not time so the 2nd best answer is to remove their capability before they strike than after.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 5:58pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 26th, 2012 at 5:24pm: I do have to point out though that I am totally disgusted by his attitude. Especially towards rachel corrie. It demonstrates that its not just the palestinians that these jews hate. They think they are gods chosen ppl and they can do whatever they want. This is also (i think) what the yanks etc think too that they are gods chosen so have to be allowed to do whatever they want. Its disgusting. Avram you do realise you killed children and families in those apartments? Innocent ppl? SOB I did not kill anyone innocent. That is fact. I am telling you 100% honesty I was in group of 4 who come under heavy fire in Gaza City and we are very lucky to not be hurt. Gunfire was very surprising and we had no option. Tanks would not fit down streets and we could not go ourselves as we had no cover. So you tell me what other choice was open to us? I like Australia but I realise in this 5 months you have no idea what life is in Israel conflict .

How would you know if you killed anyone innocent? You blew up 2 large apartment buildings! You @ least made them homeless. I suppose the seriously injured ones could live @ the hospital.


Quote:

So you tell me what other choice was open to us?

Not being there maybe?

I have seen some bad stuff. Really bad stuff. But I expect gaza is worse than anything I have seen. Ppl living in fear all the time that jews are going to suddenly attack them for no reason. Sometimes after months of nothing. Ppl in west bank their wells destroyed their homes destroyed. There lives destroyed.

No it was prolly not your choice to go there - it was your commander or whoever but you seem to agree with it which makes you just as guilty imo. Those are people. Children. Families. How can you say nobody innocent was killed?

Was it you a couple weeks ago calling them "things"? Like they arent human? I cant remember. I hope it wasnt you.

SOB

No I did not call them things.

In my time of border checkpoint control I would always show respect to Palestinian women and their children also when I receive complaints from them on west bank about settlers I would listen to them - and help them.

Tell me, why do you place blame to me for the air strike but not the people who fire from it?

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 6:25pm:

Tell me, why do you place blame to me for the air strike but not the people who fire from it?

Because you agreed with it.

You shouldn't have been there in the first place imo. Attacking a city and dwelling places of civilians because of something that happened (prolly long ago) in another area is just wrong.

SOB

If you attack Israeli soldiers you must expect a reply.
That is what happened. We do not run away.

I also said the death of the American lady was sad to hear.
But she should not have been there at all.

It was a sad story.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 6:30pm:

If you attack Israeli soldiers you must expect a reply. That is what happened. We do not run away.

The reply is out of proportion and on the wrong people though. Israeli authorities know this.

The settlements shouldn't be there @ all. Helping ppl by asking the settlers nicely isnt really help is it.

SOB

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 6:36pm:

I also said the death of the American lady was sad to hear. But she should not have been there at all. It was a sad story.

you said it was suicide. You blamed her for her own death.

SOB

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 6:30pm:

If you attack Israeli soldiers you must expect a reply. That is what happened. We do not run away.

This is problem. You ask for it.

I said she not have been there and if she was not this would not happen.
You can not stand purpose in front of bulldozer and not be some responsible for what happens.

You can not stand in front of progress.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 6:52pm:

I said she not have been there and if she was not this would not happen. You can not stand purpose in front of bulldozer and not be some responsible for what happens.

Like I said before (more than once prolly) every civilised country in the world has laws against murder. Authorities have to remove a human obstacle or work cannot proceed. Google for the problems in australia in tasmania. Police had to remove ppl from trees before they could be chopped down. The bulldozer driver - was he charged with murder?

SOB

What is the objective of the Palestinian 'resistance'?

What will satisfy them?

The elimination of Israel.

That's it? No compromise?

No, that's it. No compromise.

What form  would that elimination take?

....

Well, then I say, Israel is showing admirable restraint - like a democratic, civilised country. It is facing barabrians who will not rest until it is eliminated. With the history of pogroms and the holocaust, I think the Jews are fantastically patient and humane.

I have zero doubt that if it was the other way around, with a tiny Islamic country in the sea of infidels ho are threatening it every day the Islamic entity would have unleashed hell a long time ago. Islamic history demonstrates that.



What would you numpties do if you were responsible for 6. million Jews in Israel? Cave in and be wiped out?? 
Remember, Jews love life, Islamists love death. What would you do as an Israeli Prime Minister?

Karnal wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 7:04pm:

You can not stand in front of progress.

In the case of the Islamist in the ME, it is a case of 'you cannot stand in the way of regress'. They want to go backwards too much.

Soren wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 7:49pm:

What is the objective of the Palestinian 'resistance'? What will satisfy them? The elimination of Israel. That's it? No compromise? No, that's it. No compromise. What form  would that elimination take? .... Well, then I say, Israel is showing admirable restraint - like a democratic, civilised country. It is facing barabrians who will not rest until it is eliminated. With the history of pogroms and the holocaust, I think the Jews are fantastically patient and humane. I have zero doubt that if it was the other way around, with a tiny Islamic country in the sea of infidels ho are threatening it every day the Islamic entity would have unleashed hell a long time ago. Islamic history demonstrates that. What would you numpties do if you were responsible for 6. million Jews in Israel? Cave in and be wiped out??  Remember, Jews love life, Islamists love death. What would you do as an Israeli Prime Minister?

@ this point in time their objective is to live in peace without israeli interference. Israel has broken every ceasefire that I know of. Prolly most of them. Maybe all.

Israel is being unreasonable expecting them to lay down and die or something. Building settlements on their land. Treating them like cattle. Killing them willy nilly. Destroying their farms and their roads and their wells.

Just stop it. Stop it. Let them have west bank and gaza WITHOUT unreasonably demanding you leave settlements there and military. STICK to a peacefire.

A the very least.

SOB

PS was it you that called them things?

Soren wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 7:51pm:

Karnal wrote on May 26th, 2012 at 7:04pm: You can not stand in front of progress. In the case of the Islamist in the ME, it is a case of 'you cannot stand in the way of regress'. They want to go backwards too much.

Yes, it is the same with old boys in my countries. They experience much blockage, friendy.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 6:02pm:

Grey the rocket launches from Gaza are from mobile units. There is 30 min response time to raise F-16 strike craft for response. There is not time so the 2nd best answer is to remove their capability before they strike than after.

These 'mobile units' are what Australians call utes. You don't need a squadron of f16's to take out a ute. As I suggester an Apache helicopter could hop over the wall and take out a ute in half a minute.

If you read what I said with your blinkers off, you'd see I make a good point. It's not that people here don't understand conflict in Israel or anywhere else. It's that they see the consistancy of Israels disproportionate responses.

I do not agree.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26^th, 2012 at 8:54pm:

I do not agree.

Are you going to elaborate on that?

SOB

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=et7qhnt-xeg

Hamas, made by Israel

( US CONGRESSMAN and PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE )


Ron Paul on the creation of Hamas. He is explaining how the Mossad Created Hamas to oppose Yasser Arafat and the PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organisation).

He talks about blowback - a CIA term which means their policy did not only fail, but has worked against the interests of the policy maker.

Just like what happened when the US supported the Taliban, Saddam, Al Qaeda and the Mujahideen.

Whether the HAMAS org. is a result of 'blowback' or came into being as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood is a moot question since it certainly came into existence as a result of Israeli actions that pushed the radicalisation of the Palestinian people.

Despite Soren's efforts top stop and start history where it is convenient to support his spurious arguments; it is clear from the earliest Zionist writings that the intent was to drive Palestinians from their land and create a Jewish theocratic state in the ME.


Quote:

A.V. - 'I do not agree'

Whether yo7u agree or not the evidence is there that Apache helicopters can easily destroy utes and that Israeli actions are disproportionate. In fact in the months before 2008's 'cast lead' offensive against Gaza City HAMAS had been acting to stop radical militants associated with FATAH from firing rockets.


Quote:

In 2008, Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal, offered that Hamas would attack only military targets if the IDF would stop causing the deaths of Palestinian civilians.[309] Following a June 19, 2008 ceasefire, the al-Qassam Brigades ended its rocket attacks and arrested Fatah militants in Gaza who had continued sporadic rocket and mortar attacks against Israel. The al-Qassam Brigades resumed the attacks after the November 4 Israeli incursion into Gaza.

And so it can clearly be seen that the attack on Gaza was not to stop rocket attacks, but to stop them stopping.

Every Israeli action has been disproportionate. Let's take Lebanon for example. In 1982 Abu Nidal's 'Black September' org. tried to assassinate Israel's UK ambassador. And so Israel launched a war against all of Lebanon.

As a result of Israel's policy of not allowing war refugees to return to their homes Lebanon was already effectively two states North and South. What was the aim of this mad reprisal that plunged Lebanon into chaos and civil war? To warn that Israel wouldn't tolerate its diplomats being threatened? It's like the United States launching a blitzkreig against Poland after the assassination of McKinley.

And when Lebanon finally started to rebuild after decades of instability. To the extent that the media were reporting Lebanons economic miracle, and reporting the return of Beiruit to its position as the Paris of the Middle East. Blow me down with a feather Israel does the same thing all over again. What exactly it hoped to achieve defys logic.

It claimed it was to force the Beiruit government to attack Hezbullah. Well it was pretty obvious that Lebanon would've been delighted to be in a position of regaining its control over all of its territory. It's obvious that a government with a strong economy can do that sort of thing. It was equally obvious that after years of being a basket case Lebanon had other priorities and a war against Hezbullah would only cripple it again.

So what was Israels aim? Why did it straffe columns of refugees heading North? Why did it bomb Beiruit itself? You'd think Israel would want a strong and secure neghbour that could afford to deal with its problems like the disposessed former occupants of Palestine. Why would Israel possibly think that a failed state is a better neighbour?

The only answer is to be found in America. The Capitalists of the USA are utterly paranoid about a successful socialist altrernative. They've run a programme of destabalisation against South America from year dot. Result - 'blowback'.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 7:51am:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 26th, 2012 at 8:54pm: I do not agree. Are you going to elaborate on that? SOB

Yes the mobile units that are sent that grey says are picked up by Israeli defence system.
However immediately on launching they are moved and then they go straight to dense population area.
To take apache gunship there is a scramble time of around 10 minutes, less time than the f-16 response but by this time they are in zones where reply fire and population area makes it dangerous.

Bear in mind Israel does not control Gaza and therefore it must be planned to attack.

F-16 attack hits the zone where they went, it send a bigger message that Israel will respond with greater fire each time and also is less dangerous.
We can not just send apaches. If you have ever go to Gaza you will see why.

Cast Lead purpose was to clear away potentials for attack. Our instruction at start was to seek Hamas militants and kill them.
This came from very top.
You know we had personal visit of good luck each unit by Prime Minister?
It was very important mission to secure Israeli security.

I agreed 100% with Cast Lead and I do support 2 state solution.

Terrorists deserve the gas chamber

Whether the HAMAS org. is a result of 'blowback' or came into being as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood is a moot question since it certainly came into existence as a result of Israeli actions that pushed the radicalisation of the Palestinian people.

___________

your vision is clouded

from another perspective the mossad started

and continues to fund hamas

just like alqaeda = cia

clear reality proves this

namaste

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 12:14pm:

Terrorists deserve the gas chamber

It is Hamas who fires rockets at our women and children .

Grey comments that Hamas tries to stop it?
Please Hamas mission is destruction of Israel.
They are liars and terrorists and we will strangle Gaza until they are no longer in charge.
The people must realise this.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 12:26pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 12:14pm: Terrorists deserve the gas chamber It is Hamas who fires rockets at our women and children . Grey comments that Hamas tries to stop it? Please Hamas mission is destruction of Israel. They are liars and terrorists and we will strangle Gaza until they are no longer in charge. The people must realise this.

So if this makes someone a terrorist then clearly you are a terrorist.

Hamas is in defence. Remember that we use words by their dictionary definition here in Australia.
I would support Israel if they were in the other position but they are not they are in the aggressor/terrorist position.

Quote:

Bear in mind Israel does not control Gaza and therefore it must be planned to attack.

israel does not control gaza. An attack is an attack.


Quote:

However immediately on launching they are moved and then they go straight to dense population area.

And this is the excuse for killing civilians  - because the person you are after may be among them.

@ least you are consistent. This is the same as the attitude towards rachel corrie imo.


Quote:

I agreed 100% with Cast Lead and I do support 2 state solution.

You put unreasonable demands on the 2 state solution though.

you obviously do not see what it is thats so disgusting about your attitude (and that of the israeli position in general). The attitude that you are better somehow than anyone else and so killing them is okay. The idea that if they are there then they must want to die.

Imagine a lil kid swinging his arms around and walking towards you. If you dont get out of his way its your fault if you get hit.

SOB

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 12:26pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 12:14pm: Terrorists deserve the gas chamber It is Hamas who fires rockets at our women and children . Grey comments that Hamas tries to stop it? Please Hamas mission is destruction of Israel. They are liars and terrorists and we will strangle Gaza until they are no longer in charge. The people must realise this.

What they realise is that a bunch of Jews from Europe decided to take their land and with some help from Britain and the USA they took it and any chance they get they take more.

What you realise is that people who don't give up aren't defeated, and if they were you could have more land and do what you like with them.

What everybody else realises is that this makes Zionists look like complete and utter bastards because they are.

To change the situation somebody must change their ways. The Palestinians wont change because they are cornered. Zionists can change their ways either by going for genocide and wiping out everybody else or making an attractive peace proposal. Doing nothing isn't an option because the sand is running through the hourglass. Sooner rather than later it will start running the other way.

I support peace. I always have support for peace.

You may not have read several times on here I have said how I have behaved to both sides of conflict.
Making sure that palestinians were safer and listen to their problems when they come to me and my comrades when we are call to disputes with settlers in Hebron.

I do support 2 state resolution.

I support stable, peaceful stable borders Israel.
A Palestinians control of West Bank with only current number of Jewish settlements keep under Israel control. No more settlements.

I do not want Israel in Gaza. I myself, now I am reservist when I return, do not ever want to go into Gaza or see Gaza City ever again.
But no Hamas. They must not support Hamas if they want peace and stable border with no embargo.

Grey, understand I am moderate young Israeli. The future for our country, the young generation was wants to live in peace with the Arabs but also who wants a strong Israel.
We will not accept rocket attacks, we will not accept nuclear Iran, we will not accept suicide bombers.

But if the Arabs are preapred, then we too are for peace or war. For them they must choose.

Can all you whining leftards give your land back to the Aboriginals now please?

What they realise is that a bunch of Jews from Europe decided to take their land and with some help from Britain


What they realise is that a bunch of Jews Poms from Europe England decided to take their land.

So an Aboriginal told me.

In my 3 years in the army I was in situation which would see so many critics on here frighten to death and run away for the hills.

Not the Vietnam Veteran Aussies, from what I see - they too will know what I am talking.

Call to situation West Bank, screaming Palestinian civilians to you, gun fire surround our armored vehicles, large apartment blocks where it come from, minimum aerial support cover and little cover for us in the open.

What would you do?
Will you still be so strong supporter of these people?
Would you still be happy to cheer them when they use their women and children to draw you into the open to open fire on you?

You want to know why I hold my views? They are built from experience. From being shot to, from having Palestinians make signs to you from distance of your throat to be cut, from having petrol bomb throw to your position, from see them push their children to come and throw rocks and strones at you.

Understand the situation and from thousands and thousands of kms away how do you know???

How can you even possibly know what happens unless you watch the TV and then think - how do you know what is real and what is what the TV producer decides you see?

The intensity of battle does not change a think Avram.
You are a terrorist

Quote:

I support peace. I always have support for peace.

Avram if you supported peace you wouldn't support that gaza raid


Quote:

You may not have read several times on here I have said how I have behaved to both sides of conflict. Making sure that palestinians were safer and listen to their problems when they come to me and my comrades when we are call to disputes with settlers in Hebron.

Helping a couple women with directions doesnt absolve you of thinking its okay to kill lots of ppl.


Quote:

A Palestinians control of West Bank with only current number of Jewish settlements keep under Israel control. No more settlements.

This is the problem avram. And you are same as your masters in this attitude. There will never be peace when you want this kind of unreasonable deal.


Quote:

Can all you whining leftards give your land back to the Aboriginals now please?

You are so stupidly cryptic that no-one even knows who you are trying to insult there.


Quote:

Not the Vietnam Veteran Aussies, from what I see - they too will know what I am talking.

Appealing for help from vietnam veterans isnt going to help you. Israel is being a bully.


Quote:

What would you do?

How about NOT raid them? NOT go into their city and kill their civilians? How about that?


Quote:

Understand the situation and from thousands and thousands of kms away how do you know???

Apart from the usual sources we know because you are telling us. The fact that we are still arguing with you should make you look @ your beliefs in this regard. Could we be right? Is it possible that israel is a terrorist entity?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 2:46pm:

Apart from the usual sources we know because you are telling us. The fact that we are still arguing with you should make you look @ your beliefs in this regard. Could we be right? Is it possible that israel is a terrorist entity? SOB

No.
And comments at the UN on the Resolution vote show this


The United States used its veto to prevent the adoption of a U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Israeli military operations in the Gaza Strip.
Ten countries supported the resolution, with four countries - The United Kingdom, Denmark, Japan and Slovakia abstaining.

In explaining the U.S. veto, the U.S. representative said that the text did not display an even-handed characterization of the events in Gaza and was politically motivated.
Nor did it advance the cause of Israeli-Palestinian peace to which the United States aspired and for which it was working assiduously.

While joining other Council members in deeply regretting the loss of life in Beit Hanoun, he noted that Israeli authorities had admitted that the incident had been a mistake and intended to conduct an investigation into the events there, which he hoped would be completed expeditiously.

He said, however, that he was disturbed by the language of the resolution that was in many places biased against Israel.

For example, one of the preambular paragraphs of the text that the United States refused to support equated military operations of Israel that were legal with the firing of rockets into the territory of Israel that was terrorism.

As a result the proposed Resolution failed, despite receiving 95% nations support.

Resolution end result - 10 Yes, 4 Abstain, 1 No (USA Veto)

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

Six months afterward -



The United States used its veto power to put down a Qatari-sponsored draft resolution in the UN Security Council that would have condemned Israel’s military offensive as “disproportionate force” in the Gaza Strip, and would have demanded that Israel cease operations in the area.

United States Ambassador John Bolton said the text was unacceptable, largely because it had been overtaken by events, including the recent capture of two Israeli soldiers by Hizbollah forces.

He said the text was unbalanced and “placed demands on one side of the Middle East conflict but not the other.”  If adopted, it would have exacerbated tensions in the region, while undermining the vision of a two-state solution, as well as the credibility of the Security Council itself.


Ten countries voted for the resolution, four nations — Britain, Peru, Denmark and Slovakia — abstained. The US cast the only “No” vote, subsequently killing the resolution.

Avram you do realise if you were any other nation Israel would have been invaded ages ago don't you?

Resolution - Drafted by Pakistan and Tunisia

Expressing its grave concern at the continued deterioration of the situation on
the ground in the Palestinian territory occupied by Israel since 1967,

Condemning the broad military incursion and attacks by the Israeli occupying
forces in the area of Northern Gaza Strip, including in and around the Jabaliya
refugee camp, resulting in extensive human casualties and destruction and
exacerbating the dire humanitarian situation,

Reiterating its call upon Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by
its legal obligations and responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention
relative to the Protection of Civilians in Time of War of 12 August 1949,
Recalling the obligations of the Palestinian Authority and the Government of
Israel under the Road Map,

Condemning all acts of violence, terror, excessive and indiscriminate use of
force, and physical destruction,

Reaffirming its support for the Road Map endorsed in its resolution 1515
(2003),
1. Demands the immediate cessation of all military operations in the area of
Northern Gaza and the withdrawal of the Israeli occupying forces from that area;

2. Reiterates its call for the cessation of violence and for respect of and
adherence to legal obligations, including those under international humanitarian
law;

3. Calls on Israel, the occupying Power, to ensure the unfettered access and
safety of United Nations personnel and all medical and humanitarian aid workers to
provide emergency assistance to the civilian population, and calls for the respect of
the inviolability of the facilities of the United Nations agencies in the field,
including the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the
Near East (UNRWA);


Result Vote -

13 Yes
1 Abstain (Germany)
1 No (United States)

End Conclustion - Not Passed (USA Veto)


It seems that your views on Israel are not shared at the highest level of UN voting.
And in this example, a progressive European power Germany could not support the vote.

In fact Germany has the lowest voting against Israel behind USA. Germany understands the need to be fair on this subject it seems.

Avram don't talk about stuff you clearly do not know about

I see. So the number 1 terrorist state used its veto to protect its buddy over religion. I see why you keep mentioning the yanks now. I agree with PP's hahas.

However its not funny. Sooner or later somebody is going to stop you. Maybe even a yank. Its pretty obvious everyone ELSE knows what you are doing is wrong. I expect the yanks do to but its friggin religion stopping them from condemning you. Scared their god will condemn them.

SOB

3 years on the ground in the army and all my life in Tel Aviv?

You? You have never even come to our country.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 3:13pm:

3 years on the ground in the army and all my life in Tel Aviv? You? You have never even come to our country.

I'm talking about international politics as you mentioned

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 3:15pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:13pm: 3 years on the ground in the army and all my life in Tel Aviv? You? You have never even come to our country. I'm talking about international politics as you mentioned

USA refuses to support anti-Israel Resolutions  in the United Nations.

Germany also refuses to support anti-Israel Resolutions.

The voting is there for you to see.

So tell me, USA is biased and terrorist according to you.

But you see the stupidity in your argument when it is Pakistan putting a Resolution!!

Also is Germany therefore a terrorist too for refusing to support the resolutions?

No sorry I was wrong USA is in no way biased and Israel is right.

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 3:22pm:

No sorry I was wrong USA is in no way biased and Israel is right.

So Social Democratic Germany is biased?

Look at Germany's vote record in UN on Israeli related issues.

2004 - 07 - Germany Abstain
2004 - 12 - Germany Abstain
2008 - 03 - Germany Abstain
2008 - 09 - Germany Abstain
2009 - 01 - Germany Abstain
2011 - 07 - Germany Abstain

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 3:25pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:22pm: No sorry I was wrong USA is in no way biased and Israel is right. So Social Democratic Germany is biased? Look at Germany's vote record in UN on Israeli related issues.

That isn't a democratic decision when the people don't have a say in it.

Quote:

so tell me, USA is biased and terrorist according to you

What did you think of the invasion of iraq avram? Just wondering.

SOB

Obviously they are abstaining because they are scared of the yanks.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 3:27pm:

Quote: so tell me, USA is biased and terrorist according to you What did you think of the invasion of iraq avram? Just wondering. SOB

I supported it but not for Israel to be involved.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 3:32pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:27pm: Quote: so tell me, USA is biased and terrorist according to you What did you think of the invasion of iraq avram? Just wondering. SOB I supported it but not for Israel to be involved.

Ignoring the fact that was Israels war anyway.
Why do you then expect the US to help you with Iran or other official Israeli wars.

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 3:35pm:

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:32pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:27pm: Quote: so tell me, USA is biased and terrorist according to you What did you think of the invasion of iraq avram? Just wondering. SOB I supported it but not for Israel to be involved. Ignoring the fact that was Israels war anyway. Why do you then expect the US to help you with Iran or other official Israeli wars.

Iran is different.
I support Israel attacking Iran alone if necessary, but with USA support.

Iraq is different. They did not threaten Israel with nuclear weapons - and see when they did in 1980 (before I was born) Israel removed the thread at Osirak.

Israel must act in her interests and remove threats. This can be Palestinians suiciders, Hamas rockets, Hizbollah rockets or Iran nuclear weapons.

USA is supporter of Israel and can assist in the UN as we have seen.

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 3:32pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:27pm: Quote: so tell me, USA is biased and terrorist according to you What did you think of the invasion of iraq avram? Just wondering. SOB I supported it but not for Israel to be involved.

Oh gawd. I shoulda realised that. I forgot iraq was full of muslims wasnt it! Really I forgot. I was thinking about the fact that we invaded a country and kill so many ppl there. I forgot about them being predominantly muslim.

SOB

Avram Horowitz wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 3:37pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:35pm: Avram Horowitz wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:32pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:27pm: Quote: so tell me, USA is biased and terrorist according to you What did you think of the invasion of iraq avram? Just wondering. SOB I supported it but not for Israel to be involved. Ignoring the fact that was Israels war anyway. Why do you then expect the US to help you with Iran or other official Israeli wars. Iran is different. I support Israel attacking Iran alone if necessary, but with USA support. Iraq is different. They did not threaten Israel with nuclear weapons - and see when they did in 1980 (before I was born) Israel removed the thread at Osirak. Israel must act in her interests and remove threats. This can be Palestinians suiciders, Hamas rockets, Hizbollah rockets or Iran nuclear weapons. USA is supporter of Israel and can assist in the UN as we have seen.

How is Iran different and when did they ever threaten you with nukes?
A terrorist state will do what a terrorist state does, you are not wrong there.
Please remember that UN is just another acronym for US.


Avram, answer me this one.
Would you support Israel dropping a world ending nuke in order to protect itself and liberate Israel so that your god would save you?

Quote:

Iran is different. I support Israel attacking Iran alone if necessary, but with USA support.

Yeah. Like I said I forgot about that stuff. Oops.

Anyway I wonder what would happen in a yank president withdrew support form israel. Said you could go it alone. That would be interesting. I really thought Obama might do it but alas the yanks like their religion dont they.

Hey! Maybe when China becomes the next superpower THEY will do something about you and the yanks! They arent suppressed by a fairy in the sky and lighting bolts from paradise if they do it.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 3:44pm:

Quote: Iran is different. I support Israel attacking Iran alone if necessary, but with USA support. Yeah. Like I said I forgot about that stuff. Oops. Anyway I wonder what would happen in a yank president withdrew support form israel. Said you could go it alone. That would be interesting. I really thought Obama might do it but alas the yanks like their religion dont they. Hey! Maybe when China becomes the next superpower THEY will do something about you and the yanks! They arent suppressed by a fairy in the sky and lighting bolts from paradise if they do it. SOB

Not gunna happen, new bill about to be passed that commits US to fight for Israel going to congress now.
Why would you think Obama would do that, and what makes you think he has/had a choice?

China is the sleeping dragon and will react when provoked. Tensions are rising in Africa where the West and China are fighting for land and subsequent control of the continents invaluable resources.
And you know who actually controls most of Africa's resources right? Yeah, Israel. They just get the US to act as muscle.

So when are you leftards going to give back your land to the Aboriginals?

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 3:52pm:

So when are you leftards going to give back your land to the Aboriginals?

Bring it on! I want my day in court!

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 3:47pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:44pm: Quote: Iran is different. I support Israel attacking Iran alone if necessary, but with USA support. Yeah. Like I said I forgot about that stuff. Oops. Anyway I wonder what would happen in a yank president withdrew support form israel. Said you could go it alone. That would be interesting. I really thought Obama might do it but alas the yanks like their religion dont they. Hey! Maybe when China becomes the next superpower THEY will do something about you and the yanks! They arent suppressed by a fairy in the sky and lighting bolts from paradise if they do it. SOB Not gunna happen, new bill about to be passed that commits US to fight for Israel going to congress now. Why would you think Obama would do that, and what makes you think he has/had a choice? China is the sleeping dragon and will react when provoked. Tensions are rising in Africa where the West and China are fighting for land and subsequent control of the continents invaluable resources. And you know who actually controls most of Africa's resources right? Yeah, Israel. They just get the US to act as muscle.

It was a few years ago when I thought it. When they elected a black man because he was black and I thought he might adhere to the sterotype and be an actual "liberal" and not too religious. I was wrong and discovered it quite quickly. He is just another yank puppet president. He does what he is told. He furthers the overall corporate agenda.

Geez I sound like CW! Maggot!

Really he only cares about furthering america. When he came to oz he was just making sure the new aussie govt would follow the rules. Stuck a few troops in darwin to seal it. A symbol of our compliance. Well so he should care about his own country but why the heck dont OUR pollies care about OUR country?

The next yank president will do the same things. On the surface he will be all different but behind the scenes same old agendas. Same as our "parties".

Sorry started to rant there.

You do know this whole israel/america thing is about religion right? Yeah I have seen you mention it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone_Memorial

SOB

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 3:52pm:

So when are you leftards going to give back your land to the Aboriginals?

I answered you last time you posted that crap. Scroll back and find it lazy bugger.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 3:57pm:

Really he only cares about furthering america. When he came to oz he was just making sure the new aussie govt would follow the rules. Stuck a few troops in darwin to seal it. A symbol of our compliance. Well so he should care about his own country but why the heck dont OUR pollies care about OUR country?

As he made clear during his Nobel peace prize acceptance speech, he is the executive head of state of the US first before he is anything else.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 3:57pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:47pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:44pm: Quote: Iran is different. I support Israel attacking Iran alone if necessary, but with USA support. Yeah. Like I said I forgot about that stuff. Oops. Anyway I wonder what would happen in a yank president withdrew support form israel. Said you could go it alone. That would be interesting. I really thought Obama might do it but alas the yanks like their religion dont they. Hey! Maybe when China becomes the next superpower THEY will do something about you and the yanks! They arent suppressed by a fairy in the sky and lighting bolts from paradise if they do it. SOB Not gunna happen, new bill about to be passed that commits US to fight for Israel going to congress now. Why would you think Obama would do that, and what makes you think he has/had a choice? China is the sleeping dragon and will react when provoked. Tensions are rising in Africa where the West and China are fighting for land and subsequent control of the continents invaluable resources. And you know who actually controls most of Africa's resources right? Yeah, Israel. They just get the US to act as muscle. It was a few years ago when I thought it. When they elected a black man because he was black and I thought he might adhere to the sterotype and be an actual "liberal" and not too religious. I was wrong and discovered it quite quickly. He is just another yank puppet president. He does what he is told. He furthers the overall corporate agenda. Geez I sound like CW! Maggot! Really he only cares about furthering america. When he came to oz he was just making sure the new aussie govt would follow the rules. Stuck a few troops in darwin to seal it. A symbol of our compliance. Well so he should care about his own country but why the heck dont OUR pollies care about OUR country? The next yank president will do the same things. On the surface he will be all different but behind the scenes same old agendas. Same as our "parties". Sorry started to rant there. You do know this whole israel/america thing is about religion right? Yeah I have seen you mention it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone_Memorial SOB

The liberal/republican/whatever else labels in politics are an illusion. The ideological stances may appear different but in the practical application via government the differences are minute to the thousandth degree.
Ron Paul would be a good example of how the candidates who claim to be repub or libreal or whatever else are actually nothing of the sort anyway.
But then the best example is how all the elected ones are just the same anyway.

CW is clearly just a righty in disguise or he is doing a parody act.

If you mean America as in the people then 'he' certainly does not care about that.

Well it appears to be about religion, certainly for the public. But then the people actually at the top coordinating everything may have a different agenda.

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:00pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:57pm: Really he only cares about furthering america. When he came to oz he was just making sure the new aussie govt would follow the rules. Stuck a few troops in darwin to seal it. A symbol of our compliance. Well so he should care about his own country but why the heck dont OUR pollies care about OUR country? As he made clear during his Nobel peace prize acceptance speech, he is the executive head of state of the US first before he is anything else.

So the state of the US must not be about the people.

Quote:

Well it appears to be about religion, certainly for the public. But then the people actually at the top coordinating everything may have a different agenda.

Just before I joined this forum someone showed me that blackstone memorial page. I read a bit more about it in other places but basically it seems that this whole america/israel thing is about religion. Its weird and its scary. Read it sometime when you have time.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:14pm:

Quote: Well it appears to be about religion, certainly for the public. But then the people actually at the top coordinating everything may have a different agenda. Just before I joined this forum someone showed me that blackstone memorial page. I read a bit more about it in other places but basically it seems that this whole america/israel thing is about religion. Its weird and its scary. Read it sometime when you have time. SOB

Yeah, probably.
But from the past I know that what is said is not always the real truth.
I have doubts that the people at the top are actually dumb enough to follow religion

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:05pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:00pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:57pm: Really he only cares about furthering america. When he came to oz he was just making sure the new aussie govt would follow the rules. Stuck a few troops in darwin to seal it. A symbol of our compliance. Well so he should care about his own country but why the heck dont OUR pollies care about OUR country? As he made clear during his Nobel peace prize acceptance speech, he is the executive head of state of the US first before he is anything else. So the state of the US must not be about the people.

????

Obama made plain what his rightful first duty is - an affirmation of the oath of office that he swore on his inauguration - the oath that prevails over all others - to "faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of [his] ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:20pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:05pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:00pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:57pm: Really he only cares about furthering america. When he came to oz he was just making sure the new aussie govt would follow the rules. Stuck a few troops in darwin to seal it. A symbol of our compliance. Well so he should care about his own country but why the heck dont OUR pollies care about OUR country? As he made clear during his Nobel peace prize acceptance speech, he is the executive head of state of the US first before he is anything else. So the state of the US must not be about the people. ???? Obama made plain what his rightful first duty is - an affirmation of the oath of office that he swore on his inauguration - the oath that prevails over all others - to "faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of [his] ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

And you think he followed his oath?

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 3:59pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:52pm: So when are you leftards going to give back your land to the Aboriginals? I answered you last time you posted that crap. Scroll back and find it lazy bugger. SOB

It wasn't an answer.

If the Jews are to give land back to Palestinians, then by that logic Australians ought to give the land back to the Abo's.
Why not take the lead and give your own bit of land back to some Abo's?

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:21pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:20pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:05pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:00pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:57pm: Really he only cares about furthering america. When he came to oz he was just making sure the new aussie govt would follow the rules. Stuck a few troops in darwin to seal it. A symbol of our compliance. Well so he should care about his own country but why the heck dont OUR pollies care about OUR country? As he made clear during his Nobel peace prize acceptance speech, he is the executive head of state of the US first before he is anything else. So the state of the US must not be about the people. ???? Obama made plain what his rightful first duty is - an affirmation of the oath of office that he swore on his inauguration - the oath that prevails over all others - to "faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of [his] ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." And you think he followed his oath?

While he preserves, protects and defends the Constitution of the United States (which he has), then yes.

If he has 'furthered' America then he has acted in the interests of the US and therefore has acted appropriately as the US executive head of state.

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:25pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:21pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:20pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:05pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:00pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:57pm: Really he only cares about furthering america. When he came to oz he was just making sure the new aussie govt would follow the rules. Stuck a few troops in darwin to seal it. A symbol of our compliance. Well so he should care about his own country but why the heck dont OUR pollies care about OUR country? As he made clear during his Nobel peace prize acceptance speech, he is the executive head of state of the US first before he is anything else. So the state of the US must not be about the people. ???? Obama made plain what his rightful first duty is - an affirmation of the oath of office that he swore on his inauguration - the oath that prevails over all others - to "faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of [his] ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." And you think he followed his oath? While he preserves, protects and defends the Constitution of the United States (which he has), then yes. If he has 'furthered' America then he has acted in the interests of the US and therefore has acted appropriately as the US executive head of state.

Sorry but no one actually believes that Obama has preserved, protected or defended the constitution.
He clearly has not furthered the US either.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:25pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:59pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:52pm: So when are you leftards going to give back your land to the Aboriginals? I answered you last time you posted that crap. Scroll back and find it lazy bugger. SOB It wasn't an answer. If the Jews are to give land back to Palestinians, then by that logic Australians ought to give the land back to the Abo's. Why not take the lead and give your own bit of land back to some Abo's?

Well the difference would be that this happened in the last century and that most of us acknowledge that this land just not belong to us.
Anyway your argument doesn't prove anything other then that you are an ignorant bigot on both topics.

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:37pm:

Sorry but no one actually believes that Obama has preserved, protected or defended the constitution.

Really? You speak for every American? If he has not, then the Congress would have grounds to impeach him. Is the Congress preparing to impeach Obama?


bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:37pm:

He clearly has not furthered the US either.

Placing troops on foreign soil has been an act of every US President since WW2. Clearly the US prefers to enforce its hegemony through military presence and the US President of the day obliges.

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:41pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:37pm: Sorry but no one actually believes that Obama has preserved, protected or defended the constitution. Really? You speak for every American? If he has not, then the Congress would have grounds to impeach him. Is the Congress preparing to impeach Obama? bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:37pm: He clearly has not furthered the US either. Placing troops on foreign soil has been an act of every US President since WW2. Clearly the US prefers to enforce its hegemony and the US President of the day obliges.

Show me an American not in the mainstream media who actually thinks he has done that stuff? The majority of Americans do not support Obama and understand that he does not follow the constitution. I can show you dozens of examples but most of them I have already posted on this site and I think you have seen them.
Why would you use the congress as an example of innocence, clearly they are just as corrupt.

The point is that he is just exactly like every other president, because just like them he doesnt actually have a say on those important issues.

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:44pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:41pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:37pm: Sorry but no one actually believes that Obama has preserved, protected or defended the constitution. Really? You speak for every American? If he has not, then the Congress would have grounds to impeach him. Is the Congress preparing to impeach Obama? bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:37pm: He clearly has not furthered the US either. Placing troops on foreign soil has been an act of every US President since WW2. Clearly the US prefers to enforce its hegemony and the US President of the day obliges. Show me an American not in the mainstream media who actually thinks he has done that stuff? The majority of Americans do not support Obama and understand that he does not follow the constitution. I can show you dozens of examples but most of them I have already posted on this site and I think you have seen them. Why would you use the congress as an example of innocence, clearly they are just as corrupt. The point is that he is just exactly like every other president, because just like them he doesnt actually have a say on those important issues.

So what are the articles of impeachment?

There is a majority of rabid republicans in the Congress that would happily support impeachment if the articles were tabled.

If Obama is exactly like every other US President (with the exception of Andrew Johnson, Nixon and Clinton) then he is not suspected of breaching his duty as identified in the oath of office.

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:46pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:44pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:41pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:37pm: Sorry but no one actually believes that Obama has preserved, protected or defended the constitution. Really? You speak for every American? If he has not, then the Congress would have grounds to impeach him. Is the Congress preparing to impeach Obama? bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:37pm: He clearly has not furthered the US either. Placing troops on foreign soil has been an act of every US President since WW2. Clearly the US prefers to enforce its hegemony and the US President of the day obliges. Show me an American not in the mainstream media who actually thinks he has done that stuff? The majority of Americans do not support Obama and understand that he does not follow the constitution. I can show you dozens of examples but most of them I have already posted on this site and I think you have seen them. Why would you use the congress as an example of innocence, clearly they are just as corrupt. The point is that he is just exactly like every other president, because just like them he doesnt actually have a say on those important issues. So what are the articles of impeachment?

How about you just search 'impeach obama' on any decent search engine.

Quote:

There is a majority of rabid republicans in the Congress that would happily support impeachment if the articles were tabled.

Oh so you just support Obama cause he is a 'leftie' right?
For one example (and I can keep giving more if you dont respond) do you support his indefinite detention bill and would you be happy for it to be passed in Australia?

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:38pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:25pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:59pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:52pm: So when are you leftards going to give back your land to the Aboriginals? I answered you last time you posted that crap. Scroll back and find it lazy bugger. SOB It wasn't an answer. If the Jews are to give land back to Palestinians, then by that logic Australians ought to give the land back to the Abo's. Why not take the lead and give your own bit of land back to some Abo's? Well the difference would be that this happened in the last century and that most of us acknowledge that this land just not belong to us. Anyway your argument doesn't prove anything other then that you are an ignorant bigot on both topics.

Bit of a cop out. If you acknowledge it's not yours, then give your piece back. That would be the consistent position. And why should it matter if it was last century? (which is wrong, try 3 centuries)

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:51pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:38pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:25pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:59pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:52pm: So when are you leftards going to give back your land to the Aboriginals? I answered you last time you posted that crap. Scroll back and find it lazy bugger. SOB It wasn't an answer. If the Jews are to give land back to Palestinians, then by that logic Australians ought to give the land back to the Abo's. Why not take the lead and give your own bit of land back to some Abo's? Well the difference would be that this happened in the last century and that most of us acknowledge that this land just not belong to us. Anyway your argument doesn't prove anything other then that you are an ignorant bigot on both topics. Bit of a cop out. If you acknowledge it's not yours, then give your piece back. That would be the consistent position. And why should it matter if it was last century? (which is wrong, try 3 centuries)

What if I rent?
I would be happy to give my piece back if everyone was, not much use in just me doing it.

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:48pm:

How about you just search 'impeach obama' on any decent search engine.

;D Bloody hell! you really are 12 years old!


bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:48pm:

Quote: There is a majority of rabid republicans in the Congress that would happily support impeachment if the articles were tabled. Oh so you just support Obama cause he is a 'leftie' right? For one example (and I can keep giving more if you dont respond) do you support his indefinite detention bill and would you be happy for it to be passed in Australia?

Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during his tenure as US President citing the national interest. Bush and Obama have cited national security. It is not necessarily a failure to uphold his oath if a US President makes unpopular decisions.

What happens or doesn't happen in Australia is not the responsibility of the US President.

What some young Australians don't seem to be able to comprehend is that the US President has no obligation to defend the interests of Australia.

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:54pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:51pm: bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:38pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:25pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:59pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 3:52pm: So when are you leftards going to give back your land to the Aboriginals? I answered you last time you posted that crap. Scroll back and find it lazy bugger. SOB It wasn't an answer. If the Jews are to give land back to Palestinians, then by that logic Australians ought to give the land back to the Abo's. Why not take the lead and give your own bit of land back to some Abo's? Well the difference would be that this happened in the last century and that most of us acknowledge that this land just not belong to us. Anyway your argument doesn't prove anything other then that you are an ignorant bigot on both topics. Bit of a cop out. If you acknowledge it's not yours, then give your piece back. That would be the consistent position. And why should it matter if it was last century? (which is wrong, try 3 centuries) What if I rent? I would be happy to give my piece back if everyone was, not much use in just me doing it.

If you rent, then allow them to take over your unit/house. Why should it matter if everyone else was doing it when you have a principled stance on this issue? Can Israelis use that reasoning too? 

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:56pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:48pm: How about you just search 'impeach obama' on any decent search engine. ;D Bloody hell! you really are 12 years old! bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:48pm: Quote: There is a majority of rabid republicans in the Congress that would happily support impeachment if the articles were tabled. Oh so you just support Obama cause he is a 'leftie' right? For one example (and I can keep giving more if you dont respond) do you support his indefinite detention bill and would you be happy for it to be passed in Australia? Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during his tenure as US President citing the national interest. Bush and Obama have cited national security. It is not necessarily a failure to uphold his oath if a US President makes unpopular decisions. What happens or doesn't happen in Australia is not the responsibility of the US President. What some young Australians don't seem to be able to comprehend is that the US President has no obligation to defend the interests of Australia.

Yes I am the child here because clearly I just believe everything I am told about the issue.

I think you will find that the indefinite detention bill (among many other things) do violate the constitution. And it is a really basic part.

I wasn't saying he would implement it, I am just asking if you would actually support these things if they affected you.

Do you even know what the indefinite detention bill entails?

When did I ever say that?

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 4:48pm:

How about you just search 'impeach obama' on any decent search engine.

Obama vampire

About 38,100,000 results (0.36 seconds)

"obama is gay"

About 253,000 results (0.41 seconds)

obama is a communist kgb agent

About 3,590,000 results (0.43 seconds)

NorthOfNorth wrote on May 27^th, 2012 at 5:02pm:

bobbythefap1 wrote on May 27th, 2012 at 4:48pm: How about you just search 'impeach obama' on any decent search engine. Obama vampire About 38,100,000 results (0.36 seconds) "obama is gay" About 253,000 results (0.41 seconds) obama is a communist kgb agent About 3,590,000 results (0.43 seconds)

Yes I know you dont have anything to back up your claims so please keep posting irrelevant crap