UN mission to Jenin

[laurentius]

Well tell you the truth, dying occupators are always fun to count. Applies mainly to soldiers, but the settlers are practicly soldiers arent they

[laurentius]

Left is my way. Don't need no red flag to show it. And apparently misslead people

[Az]

advocating murder of non-combatants as the way to go.

...

[laurentius]

look whos talking about killing civilians


The settlers are just as terrorists as the islamists are

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Dalgetti
Dino , do you think that canadians should attack the US , over that little bombing raid your fellow did in Afghanistan?

If we had attacked thier positions in a coordinated assault from both land and air for over two hours while they were displaying a large, bright Canadian flag on a bright, cloudless day after subjecting them to several recon flights, they would have cause to.

[Az]

touche.

I still see no reason for the Israelis to attack it .

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by Ecowiz Returns
Do you have that count?
Of course if they took the in such account as the last two of them (one rehinforcing the other with no visible effect)...

I'm not sure if they are reinforcing or not, but I imagine they are at least in aprt reinforcing themselves.

But then again, why instead of reinforcing things about israel, start dealing with other countries?

How many resolutions regarding.. oh.. saudi arabia are there?

They must have known, don't they? There were already reports about deaths and burrials, at that time.

"They must have known"....

I didn't know they have an oracle at the UN. Cool.

The fact is that now, weeks after the action, all the aid agencies say that there wasn't a massacare and they suspect that no more than 80 bodies will be found.

The UN doesn't care however since it's politicized.

I hoped this one would be easy to recognize: there were 5, and not 3 the members. Either the report is oudated or omissive. Either way it is inacurate.

It was outdated.
In any case, several are known to be anti-israeli, and less than half are military experts.

I'm no speciallist. However, I recall one being mentioned and that isn't present: denying medical support.

THere's a perfectly good reason for it - terrorist activity disguised as medical support.

Palestinains use ambulances to transfer weapons and bombs. That is against international law as well, yet you haven't found the time to condemn it.

This gives us a very viable reason to stop them.

If you need evidence, search www.haaretzdaily.com for 'ambulance'.

To decide wheater some thing is a warcrime you have the Law.
To figure if a warcrime occured you need to investigate.
Furthermore, if single soldiers comitted warcrimes, the State of Israel is not to be blamed. But if the Israelli Goverment boicots the investigation that would potentially uncover those crimes it becomes an accomplice - agian not the State of Isreal, but it's Governement.

We do not wish to boicot the investigation.
We wish to make sure it gives us a fair treatment, which we feel we don't get.

After all, it were we that asked for the investigation in the first place.

No, the article is not wrong because it is pro-israeli. It is baised, due to it. A biased view can sometimes be more accurate than one that tries not to be biased. It's only harder, and much less likelly to occur.

fine, then it's biased but accurate.

So why don't you take the information into account?

But, since the reporter proposes to make clear the reasons behind Israelli boicot, she should have done that in a critical fashion, presenting her own ideas or, at least, critically commenting Israelli's justifications

Why the hell must the reporter criticise something?
Can't reporters ever agree?

Why is it that your view which is against the Israeli decision, must be followed?

Sorry Siro, not you or I are equiped to question the best way to make such a commission. You argue that 2 out of 5 members having military background is not enough. Based on what?

Based on the fact that 2 are military experts, two are peaceniks, and the tie breaker is anti-semitic.

You are naive if you think there weren't.
The article is missing the official justification given to the atitudes reported. If I were a reported I would, at least present those.

You still fail to quote the official justification. Why is that?

I had heared that story before. First time I heared it it lack context, but had much more than this. The comparison was made when it was proposed to have a branch of the Red Cross with the Star of David. The comparison is absurd and most unhappy, but, given the fact that only one nation is officially of jewish religion, the proposal is a bit absurd by itself too.

Why so?
Don't the Jews deserve their own branch with their own symbol?
That's religious intolerance.

However, can you explain me why wasn't he sumarilly discharged for such a hatefull comment?

Because no one really cares!!

Why isn't Heider discharged, after all he made anti-semitic remarks? Why isn't Le-Penn discharged, he is a sort of a holocaust denier?

No one cares!!

Maybe those that know him, know also that he is not anti-semitic.

Theories are nice.

The facts I have say that he compared the david shield to the swaistika.

The fact that no onter country presented reservations regarding him, also point to the fact that that expression was an unfortunate incident.

*unfortunate incident*?

Perhaps it was unfortunate in a meaning that he didn't want to make this public.

Still, there was no real reason for not accepting the Israeli Shield of David service into the Red Cross.

[Sirotnikov]

Dal, if you see a guy with a gun approaches someone, shoots him in the head and runs away, will you think it's a mistake because you dont know the motive?

It's crystal clear that the attack was deliberate. I believe that the issue is much more complicated than "the IAF sank an American ship" and even the US has it's reasons to "ignore" the attack. I dont think that the true story around the incident will be ever uncensored.

a) I disagree with you. I think that we'd be stupid to attack the americans and expect them to take it.

b) If it was deliberate, the americans would slowly try to screw us (perhaps they are trying, with oslo )

c) in any case, shut up fool. remember what sharon said - unity.

[laurentius]

Yeah you're getting closer to it Siro, We are all born into this world just to screw you up(e.g. with oslo)

[Sirotnikov]

laurentius, you're already screwed up.

don't help us anymore, eh?

the only way to deal with terrorists is to kill the last one of them.

and until we see that the pals decide to stop terror and accept two countries principle, we will continue occupying them in order to make sure we kill terrorists before they reach israel.

[laurentius]

So Siro, you still believe that bull****. Kill by the gun, die by the gun, it all comes back to you.
Well have a nice life (which propably is not going to last that long)

[Saint Marcus]

oh , nice avatroll , Marcus.

Thanks. And yeah, it's a troll. But not aimed at Israelis, but at people who think European is a synonym (sp) for anti-semite. I'm really, really sick of being called an anti semite (not here per se, but in general) just because I'm a European, voter of the centre-left, and against Israel's policies.

Good thread Marcus!

Merci

[Sirotnikov]

http://www.idf.il/english/news/funeral.stm

[Sirotnikov]

have a nice life with the only thing threatening you being raindeers, laurentius.

marcus, how the f*** is your avatar supposed to make people think you're not an anti-semite if you show a burning israeli flag, which is modeled after the israeli taliss (holi cover)?

[Oldenbarnevelt]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus


Thanks. And yeah, it's a troll. But not aimed at Israelis, but at people who think European is a synonym (sp) for anti-semite. I'm really, really sick of being called an anti semite (not here per se, but in general) just because I'm a European, voter of the centre-left, and against Israel's policies.

Relax, Marcus, you're no anti-Semite!

You only think Israel shouldn't defend itself...

-