Report; Zionist assassins bomb sleeping civilians. - Page 3 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

42 Regular · #31 (**permalink**) 02-20-2008

Quote:

42 regular;

Quote:
Odd that even the HAMAS POLICE don't say so.

I'm pleased to see that you've added Hamas to your list of credible sources. I'll be referring back to that later.

How would Hamas failing to lie about a single incident suddenly make them a credible source?
You can bet that if there had been any possiblity of palming this off as an IDF airstrike they'd have said so.
As it is, with homemade rockets littering the site, pretending that it was an airstrike would have been counter productive on several levels.

moon · #32 (**permalink**) 02-20-2008

Who has identified the 'bits of Palestinian rockets' that lead you to believe that a Palestine leader, on the Zionist illegal death list, was sleeping on them with his family ?

Note the other recent Zionist air strikes linked to. I submit that they have failed to accept responsibility for this one because the civilian death toll is so high. It's their pattern.

Quote:

How would Hamas failing to lie about a single incident suddenly make them a credible source?

You've just quoted Hamas as a credible source. Make up your mind.

42 Regular · #33 (**permalink**) 02-20-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by moon

You've just quoted Hamas as a credible source. Make up your mind.

my words

Quote:

Odd that even the HAMAS POLICE don't say so.

So what Hamas doesn't say to support your claim is somehow a positive statement?
Had I referred to what Hamas said rather than to what they did not say you might have had a point.

42 Regular · #34 (**permalink**) 02-20-2008

Quote:

Of course it is baiting; you cannot rationally debate the issue's you argue so you have to resort to attacking the person.

Pot calling the kettle black .

Quote:

you cannot rationally debate the issue's you argue so you have to resort to attacking the person.

The question was

Quote:

Originally Posted by jviehe
Why do you all still read Moons posts exactly?

Quote:

you post Wikipedia articles

Your link on the 1933 boycott lead to a site that tried to link the supposed "World Jewry" to the Illuminati through the French gift of the Statue of Liberty to the US.
I'm sure that you consider White Power and Conspiracy Sites, or both roled into one, to be reliable unbiazed sources. Let me add that to my notes.

Fidei Defensor · #35 (**permalink**) 02-20-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by moon

Note the other recent Zionist air strikes linked to. I submit that they have failed to accept responsibility for this one because the civilian death toll is so high. It's their pattern.

On the basis of what evidence (other than speculation)?

How do you square that with the observed smoke and fire coming from Fayed's house prior to the explosion? Are we to believe that was spontaneous combustion coincidentally taking place seconds before impact?

Imperator · #36 (**permalink**) 02-20-2008

we were discussing moons original post that started this thread.....so, was it the Israelis or not? Moon are you using other past air strikes to somehow keep this thread going just to make it a point to attack other past transgressions? If so start another thread,,,, that is dishonest imho.

You have as you have, as shown in the past, plenty of examples…you are just trying to make yourself right here….give it up. I gave you the cover in an earlier post...don't get pugnacious.

Frank · #37 (**permalink**) 02-20-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by 42 Regular

I'm sure that you consider White Power and Conspiracy Sites, or both roled into one, to be reliable unbiazed sources. Let me add that to my notes.

When exposing Israel I use reports from reputable human rights organisations, the International Court of Justice and the reports of independent UN appointed special rapporteurs...

I certainly do not need "White Power" websites to effectively criticise Israel. It surprises me that Moon uses sources like "electronicintifada" when more damning information can be found at Human Rights Watch, BTselem or from the reports of Dr. John Dugard.

Quote:

Your link on the 1933 boycott lead to a site that tried to link the supposed "World Jewry" to the Illuminati through the French gift of the Statue of Liberty to the US.

Actually I used the Wikipedia site for the graphic since you seem to view that source as reputable...

moon · #38 (**permalink**) 02-20-2008

Imperator;

Quote:

You have as you have, as shown in the past, plenty of examples…you are just trying to make yourself right here….give it up. I gave you the cover in an earlier post...don't get pugnacious.

Examples of other , very recent, Zionist airstrikes are included to emphasise that the Zionists are employing a program of attacking Gaza with aircraft. That should be obvious.

Notice also the Zionist's disregard of civilian casualties in this program of airstrikes.

So, we have evidence of a program of airstrikes which disregard civilian casualties. Further, we have a report, the subject of the thread, of another Zionist airstrike with extensive civilian casualties, the difference being that the pro-Zionists are squawking over this latest atrocity and blaming it on all manner of improbable causes.

Quote:

you are just trying to make yourself right here….give it up.

Nonsense. I'm offering corroborating evidence. Let's see you deny it.

Frank;

Quote:

It surprises me that Moon uses sources like "electronicintifada"

Electronic Intifada, based in Chicago, have an excellent team of journalists and researchers and extensive links with people on the front line. They include photographic evidence and first-hand informations which are invaluable in keeping the illegal occupation in the spotlight. In short they are a highly reputable source.

Frank · #39 (**permalink**) 02-20-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by moon

Examples of other , very recent, Zionist airstrikes are included to emphasise that the Zionists are employing a program of attacking Gaza with aircraft. That should be obvious.

Moon; you could save yourself some hassle by using more reputable sources; if you want to find records of Israeli war crimes go to the human rights groups...

moon · #40 (**permalink**) 02-20-2008

Electronic Intifada are accurate and , very importantly, current. You'd be well advised to subscribe.

42 regular;

Quote:

So what Hamas doesn't say to support your claim is somehow a positive statement?
Had I referred to what Hamas said rather than to what they did not say you might have had a point.

You've just got yourself into another pickle. You can't quote Hamas just when it suits you and decry Hamas when it doesn't. That's hypocrisy, old chap.

Frank · #41 (**permalink**) 02-20-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by moon

Frank;

Electronic Intifada, based in Chicago, have an excellent team of journalists and researchers and extensive links with people on the front line. They include photographic evidence and first-hand informations which are invaluable in keeping the illegal occupation in the spotlight.

I do not object to them myself; but they do seem to have a pro-Palestinian slant. The motto of the publication is "Palestine's Weapon of Mass Instruction."

Now I am not attacking them, I like their work, but using them as a source in an actual debate may infringe on the appeal to authority fallacy...

42 Regular · #42 (**permalink**) 02-20-2008

Lets look at Dr. John Dugard for a moment.

Quote:

John Dugard, a South African professor of international law and an ad hoc Judge on the International Court of Justice, serving as the Special Rapporteur for the United Nations on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories described the situation in the West Bank as "an apartheid regime ... worse than the one that existed in South Africa." [23]. Dugard has since become an outspoken critic of the separation barrier and of Israeli practices in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.[24]

Quote:

Critics argue that the term is inaccurate, anti-Semitic, dangerous, [37] and used as a rhetorical device to isolate Israel. [1]

Ian Buruma, Professor of Democracy, Human Rights & Journalism at Bard College, New York, finds the comparison to be "intellectually lazy, morally questionable, and possibly even mendacious." Though he disagrees with Israel's policies in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, in his view:

Inside the state of Israel, there is no apartheid. In proportion to its population, Israel has the largest minority within its borders of any country in the Middle East. The official figure for Copts in Egypt is 10%. Non-Jews, mostly Arab Muslims, make up 20% of the Israeli population, and they enjoy full citizen's rights. Israel is one of the few Middle Eastern states where Muslim women are allowed to vote.[38]

In 2002, Lee Bollinger, then President of Columbia University, said that the analogy of Israel to South Africa at the time of apartheid, "is both grotesque and offensive". [39] David Matas, senior counsel to B'nai Brith Canada, argues that the starting point for anti-Zionists is the "vocabulary of condemnation", rather than specific criticism of the practises of Israel. He writes that "any unsavoury verbal weapon that comes to hand is used to club Israel and its supporters. The reality of what happens in Israel is ignored. What matters is the condemnation itself. For anti-Zionists, the more repugnant the accusation made against Israel the better."[1] Because apartheid is universally condemned, and a global coalition helped to bring down the South African apartheid regime, anti-Zionists "dream of constructing a similar global anti-Zionism effort", writes Matas. "The simplest and most direct way for them to do so is to label Israel as an apartheid state. The fact that there is no resemblance whatsoever between true apartheid and the State of Israel has not stopped anti-Zionists for a moment." [1]

In 2004, Jean-Christophe Rufin, former vice-president of Médecins Sans Frontières and president of Action Against Hunger, recommended in a report about anti-Semitism [40] commissioned by French Interior Minister Dominique de Villepin[41] that the charge of apartheid and racism against Israel be criminalized in France.[37] He wrote:

[T]here is no question of penalising political opinions that are critical, for example, of any government and are perfectly legitimate. What should be penalised in the perverse and defamatory use of the charge of racism against those very people who were victims of racism to an unparalleled degree. The accusations of racism, of apartheid, of Nazism carry extremely grave moral implications. These accusations have, in the situation in which we find ourselves today, major consequences which can, by contagion, put in danger the lives of our Jewish citizens. It is why we invite reflection on the advisability and applicability of a law ... which would permit the punishment of those who make without foundation against groups, institutions or states accusations of racism and utilise for these accusations unjustified comparisons with apartheid or Nazism.[37]

In 2003, South Africa's minister for home affairs Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi said that "The Israeli regime is not apartheid. It is a unique case of democracy".[42] According to Fred Taub, the President of Boycott Watch, "[t]he assertion ... that Israel is practicing apartheid is not only false, but may be considered libelous. ... The fact is that it is the Arabs who are discriminating against non-Muslims, especially Jews."[43]

In The Trouble with Islam Today, Irshad Manji lists a number of issues that she argues show the allegation of apartheid in Israel to be misleading. She writes that Arabs can run for office; there are several Arab political parties; and Arab-Muslim legislators have veto powers. In 2003, when two Arab political parties were disqualified for supporting terrorism, the judiciary overturned the disqualifications. Women and the poor can vote. Emile Habibi, an Arab, was awarded the Israel Prize for literature. Hebrew-speaking children are encouraged to learn Arabic. Road signs are bilingual. Arabs, Jews, and others study side-by-side in universities, and live in the same apartment buildings. Palestinans who commute from the West Bank are entitled to state benefits and legal protections. Israel has a free Arab Press, Al-Quds. [44]

Frank · #43 (**permalink**) 02-20-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by 42 Regular

Lets look at Dr. John Dugard for a moment.

And as usual your criticism of Dr. Dugard comes from a Wikipedia; you will notice that 42 Regular omits the link to his Wikipedia sources? Is that to hide the footnoted sources?

Quote:

Inside the state of Israel, there is no apartheid. In proportion to its population, Israel has the largest minority within its borders of any country in the Middle East. The official figure for Copts in Egypt is 10%. Non-Jews, mostly Arab Muslims, make up 20% of the Israeli population, and they enjoy full citizen's rights. Israel is one of the few Middle Eastern states where Muslim women are allowed to vote

Here is where Zionists twist Dr. Dugards position; Dr. Dugard made the Apartheid comparison in relation to Israeli actions and policy in the Occupied Palestinian Territories which are OUTSIDE of Israel. While we could attack Israel for banning Jew/gentile marriage, discriminating against Israeli-Arabs in budgets not to mention enacting laws to bar gentile Knesset members from challenging the Jewish nature of the state Dr. Dugard does no such thing...

His reports do not even address Israeli internal politics; so Wkipedia is throwing us a red herring argument.

Quote:

In 2003, South Africa's minister for home affairs Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi said that "The Israeli regime is not apartheid. It is a unique case of democracy".[42] According to Fred Taub, the President of Boycott Watch, "[t]he assertion ... that Israel is practicing apartheid is not only false, but may be considered libelous. ... The fact is that it is the Arabs who are discriminating against non-Muslims, especially Jews."[43]

What I find interesting is that the President of the Congress of South African Trade Unions said that what Israel practices is worse than SA Apartheid actually agreeing with Dr. Dugard:

The "apartheid Israel state" is worse than the apartheid that was conducted in South Africa, Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) president Willie Madisha said on Monday.

He said Palestinians were being attacked with heavy machinery and tanks used in war, which had never happened in South Africa.

'Apartheid Israel' worse than apartheid SA : Mail & Guardian Online

Quote:

John Dugard, a South African professor of international law and an ad hoc Judge on the International Court of Justice, serving as the Special Rapporteur for the United Nations on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories described the situation in the West Bank as "an apartheid regime ... worse than the one that existed in South Africa." [23]. Dugard has since become an outspoken critic of the separation barrier and of Israeli practices in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.[24]

And you will notice that 42 Regular does not provide any actual criticism of the Dr. Dugard's observations, conclusions and subsequence reports. He mere provides a Wikipedia article omitting the link likely fearing people may read the following counterpoints:

Israeli apartheid I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Israeli apartheid II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fidei Defensor · #44 (**permalink**) 02-20-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by moon

So, we have evidence of a program of airstrikes which disregard civilian casualties. Further, we have a report, the subject of the thread, of another Zionist airstrike with extensive civilian casualties, the difference being that the pro-Zionists are squawking over this latest atrocity and blaming it on all manner of improbable causes.

Given the work of the PCHR's fieldworkers and lawyer who gathered field information and eyewitness testimonies from the scene of the tragedy, it appears to be you that is blaming it on an improbable cause. It is inconceivable that smoke and fire would emanate from the man's house coincidentally just before the Israelis hit it with a bomb. When asked to square the inconsistency, you have ignored it. It's evident you simply prefer to believe that this was the result of an Israeli airstrike and so adopt and propagate that story, evidence be damned.

Quote:

I'm offering corroborating evidence.

No, you haven't.

Imperator · #45 (**permalink**) 02-20-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by moon

Imperator;

Examples of other , very recent, Zionist airstrikes are included to emphasise that the Zionists are employing a program of attacking Gaza with aircraft. That should be obvious.

Notice also the Zionist's disregard of civilian casualties in this program of airstrikes.

So, we have evidence of a program of airstrikes which disregard civilian casualties. Further, we have a report, the subject of the thread, of another Zionist airstrike with extensive civilian casualties, the difference being that the pro-Zionists are squawking over this latest atrocity and blaming it on all manner of improbable causes.

Nonsense. I'm offering corroborating evidence. Let's see you deny it.

Frank;

Electronic Intifada, based in Chicago, have an excellent team of journalists and researchers and extensive links with people on the front line. They include photographic evidence and first-hand informations which are invaluable in keeping the illegal occupation in the spotlight. In short they are a highly reputable source.

so, you are totally discounting the story, where in it may have been started at the home IN the home..not through some external nefarious source?

are the journalists in the field or back at the office? And are they credentialed?...i.e. journalists that have like, been to journalism school etc....?

and what happened to the pchr? aren't they reputable anymore?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode