It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Israel Fires 'Warning' Shots Into Gaza

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 06:42 PM
link   
Sorry,

but I think it is important to see that the terror-organisation HAMAS

[1] - has been unable to handle their weapons during a ralley
[2] - afterwards tried to blame Isarel for the HAMAS misshandling
[3] - fired barrages of Qassam rockets into our county


*and*


Originally posted by intrepid


Personally, I think ALL of the politicians in the area have failed their people,



The HAMAS is a terror-organisation- and not a political party.



[edit on 28-9-2005 by Riwka]




posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Riwka
Sorry,

but I think it is important to see that the terror-organisation HAMAS

[1] - has been unable to handle their weapons during a ralley
[2] - afterwards tried to blame Isarel for the HAMAS misshandling
[3] - fired barrages of Qassam rockets into our county


So you are saying the Mossad don't do the same thing? Or are they just better at covering their tracks?



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by Riwka
Sorry,

but I think it is important to see that the terror-organisation HAMAS

[1] - has been unable to handle their weapons during a ralley
[2] - afterwards tried to blame Isarel for the HAMAS misshandling
[3] - fired barrages of Qassam rockets into our county


So you are saying the Mossad don't do the same thing? Or are they just better at covering their tracks?


Yes, I say so. Mossad don't do the same thing.

First of all, Mossad - the Institute for Intelligence and Special Tasks - is NO terror-organisation, but has responsibility for human intelligence collection, covert action, and counterterrorism.

Furthermore, Mossad is able to handle their weapons.



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Riwka
Yes, I say so. Mossad don't do the same thing.

First of all, Mossad - the Institute for Intelligence and Special Tasks - is NO terror-organisation, but has responsibility for human intelligence collection, covert action, and counterterrorism.

Furthermore, Mossad is able to handle their weapons.


So they just do it better? Why aren't they a terrorist organisation to Palistinians? Is there a different division of Israels military that are doing what is considered by them as aggressive acts?

I really should preface MY feelings on this matter. I believe the governing people on both sides of this issue are letting the populous down.



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong But i haven't seen any action on either parties part (with the excpetion of giving gaza) that says that either side really wants peace...]


what? evicting thousands of their own people which cost billions and leaves them open to attack then waiting till now after dozens of attacks to respond and you say this?



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

Why aren't they a terrorist organisation to Palistinians?



Put it simply: because the Mossad is no terrorist organisation

But the HAMAS is a terrorist organisation - with a terrorist goal: to erase Israel.


Originally posted by intrepid

Is there a different division of Israels military that are doing what is considered by them as aggressive acts?


There is a clear difference between an 'aggressive act' and a terror act.

The (outlawed) Kach (Kahane Chai) would be a jewish terrrorist organisation











[edit on 28-9-2005 by Riwka]



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Riwka

Originally posted by intrepid

Why aren't they a terrorist organisation to Palistinians?



Put it simply: because the Mossad is no terrorist organisation

But the HAMAS is a terrorist organisation - with a terrorist goal: to erase Israel.


OK Riwka but WHO defines what is a terrorist organisation is? If you ask an outsider, I see no difference between the two. The methods are the same BUT one is better at it than the other. The difference between a single shot and a hand grenade imo.


...with a terrorist goal: to erase Israel.


Or with a willingness to survive?

You're politicians are keeping you at this.

[edit on 28-9-2005 by intrepid]



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

OK Riwka but WHO defines what is a terrorist organisation is?



I think democratic states define this. As far as I know,

the U.N says terrorism is "the peacetime equivalent of a war crime"

and according to the United States Department of Defense, terrorism is "the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological."

and



Originally posted by intrepid

If you ask an outsider, I see no difference between the two.



I think that comes because you did never look into details. With that logic you could say your local policemen are also 'terrorists'.



Originally posted by intrepid


...with a terrorist goal: to erase Israel.


Or with a willingness to survive?


No. Please read The Charter Of The Hamas

[edit on 28-9-2005 by Riwka]



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Riwka

Originally posted by intrepid

OK Riwka but WHO defines what is a terrorist organisation is?



I think democratic states define this. As far as I know,

the U.N says terrorism is "the peacetime equivalent of a war crime"

and according to the United States Department of Defense, terrorism is "the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological."

and



Originally posted by intrepid

If you ask an outsider, I see no difference between the two.



I think that comes because you did never look into details. With that logic you could say your local policemen are also 'terrorists'.


This is the first time I've seen your post as partisan Riwka. There are two sides to most agenda's. You've quoted the UN, which has been thrown aside by the US, then quoted the US. Which and what side? Can you quote the same things from China, Equador, Iceland?

Let's get away from quoting and get to logic, where REAL people think, where things make sense.

Are you willing to go there?



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

This is the first time I've seen your post as partisan Riwka.
. . .
Let's get away from quoting and get to logic, where REAL people think, where things make sense.

Are you willing to go there?


You call her "partisan."

And yet you gleefully "define down" the meaning of terrorism so that it applies to the internationally recongnized, democratically elected government of one nation,

but DOESN'T apply to "freedom fighters" who
1. don't wear uniforms
2. prefer civilian targets
3. go for the maximum in human suffering
4. murder civilian hostages.
5. dedicate themselves to the cause of genocide
6. sworn to eradicate a government that has relinquished all territorial claims on them.
7. has made peace overtures.


I'm not saying that Riwka is neutral

But if she's partisan, then your a propagandist.

And not for peace.

You wanting to "get away from quotes" looks, to someone who just tuned in, like the argument of someone who'd rather not think about evidence of their own side's acts.


[edit on 28-9-2005 by dr_strangecraft]



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft

Originally posted by intrepid

This is the first time I've seen your post as partisan Riwka.
. . .
Let's get away from quoting and get to logic, where REAL people think, where things make sense.

Are you willing to go there?


You call her "partisan."

And yet you gleefully "define down" the meaning of terrorism so that it applies to the internationally recongnized, democratically elected government of one nation,

but DOESN'T apply to "freedom fighters" who
1. don't wear uniforms
2. prefer civilian targets
3. go for the maximum in human suffering
4. murder civilian hostages.
5. dedicate themselves to the cause of genocide
6. sworn to eradicate a government that has relinquished all territorial claims on them.
7. has made peace overtures.


I'm not saying that Riwka is neutral

But if she's partisan, then your a propagandist.

And not for peace.


Whoa, I call a spade a spade and get targetted? I've said all along that both gov't's are wrong, they care little for the people, easily documented,

Now I'm a propogandist?

WHY?

I'd like to see how you are going to defend this.

I'd reread the thread if I were you.



posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 09:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
Personally, I think ALL of the politicians in the area have failed their people, BOTH SIDES!

As Riwka pointed out, you are implying that Hamas (one of the subjects of this thread) is a political party, rather than the terrorist organization. You are falsely elevating them to the status of politicians, when they don’t do the things politicians do (like hold referenda and sign accords). They just kill civilians.


Originally posted by intrepid
So you are saying the Mossad don't do the same thing? Or are they just better at covering their tracks?

Again, claiming a moral equivalence. Does Mossad publish children’s cartoons saying that the enemies are pigs and that God is happy when they are slain? PLO and Hammas have put out precisely that propaganda regarding Jews---all Jews, not merely the citizens of Israel. Mossad DOES NOT do that sort of thing.


Originally posted by intrepid
I believe the governing people on both sides of this issue are letting the populous down.

But Hammas isn’t a government. It claims to be a militia. They don’t tax people, just take donations for killing.


Originally posted by intrepid
I see no difference between the two.

Maybe because you’ve already decided that there is no difference to see.


Originally posted by intrepid
Or with a willingness to survive?


Is that what it takes to survive, having your teenagers blow people up, when they’ve already agreed to the principle of you setting up your own sovereign state? Do you have to destroy another state, “in order to survive?” That sounds a hell of a lot like manifest destiny, rather than mere survival.

Propaganda, yes.
Claiming that the aggressors are morally equivalent to their victims.

You definitely imply that Israel should not retaliate if attacked. Yet Hammas et al is not responsible if they attack the enemy and accidentally blow up a bunch of their own members in the bargain.

Try this:
Explain how Israel should respond to these attacks.

Explain what Hammas could do, if anything, that would make you think they were worse that the Israeli government.



posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 03:16 AM
link   
Comparing the Hammas to the Mossad is really as ridiculous as it gets.
Just, for one second, look at the goals and objectives of these two organisations and then analyse what these organisations did over the past years.

You'll see the light soon enough then.



posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 07:46 AM
link   
Ah Yes!

Its all Clear to me now, why the Isreal evacuated Gaza:

So they can have a New Military Tesing Ground!

It was obvious that Artillery and Combat Aircraft fire could not be used on Gaza when the Settlers were inside. But now that Problem is removed and the only People in Gaza are Palestinian People!

Keep them all in this Closed Strip, Build Walls and Checkpoints and Barricades and...

Fire At Will!

I knew Sharon had a Bigger Plan.


Also here is Someting for all the MOSSAD Fans:

- THE MOSSAD SYMBOL -



Top: "kee betachbulot ta'ase lecha milchama"

Translation: "With clandestine Terrorism we will conduct war"

[edit on 29/9/05 by Souljah]



posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft

Originally posted by intrepid
I believe the governing people on both sides of this issue are letting the populous down.

But Hammas isn’t a government. It claims to be a militia. They don’t tax people, just take donations for killing.


So, where is the Palisinian gov't? Why aren't they dealing with these people? Like I said both sides


You definitely imply that Israel should not retaliate if attacked. Yet Hammas et al is not responsible if they attack the enemy and accidentally blow up a bunch of their own members in the bargain.


I implied no such thing. I think you better reread what I posted. I didn't imply anything, I came right out and said one side of the killing was as culpable as the other.


Try this:
Explain how Israel should respond to these attacks.


Try this:
How should Palistine respond when Israel initiates attacks?


Explain what Hammas could do, if anything, that would make you think they were worse that the Israeli government.


I'd rather be pro-active. I'd applaude whoever would take a step back and stop this nonsense.



posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah

Also here is Someting for all the MOSSAD Fans:

- THE MOSSAD SYMBOL -



Top: "kee betachbulot ta'ase lecha milchama"

Translation: "With clandestine Terrorism we will conduct war"


No.

That is a wrong translation.

The correct translation is:

Betahbulot Ta'ase Lekha Milkhama - בתחבולות תעשה לך מלחמה
Translation: "For by wise counsel thou shalt make thy war" (Proverbs XXIV, 6)

And if you take a look at the Mossad Site, the actual motto is

Be-ein Tahbulot Yipol Am; Uteshua Berov Yoetz - באין תחבולות יפול עם, ותשועה ברוב יועץ
Translation: "Where no counsel is, the people fall, but in the multitude of counselors there is safety" (Proverbs XI/14)



posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 09:34 AM
link   
I dont want to confuse things, but can we get an understanding that there are two sides to the israeli government...

those that want peace, and those that want genocide, or expulsion of palestinians...

Obviously the Gaza sacrifice was a gesture towards peace (unless souljah is right) but was waidely opposed by most of the people and much of the government (understandable)

but it puts a different twist on Intrepids statement of "both governments are to blame for letting the people down"... Of which i agree...

I also will state that i have hopes that there will be another cease fire...
and that this palestinian government is much better than the last...



posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
I dont want to confuse things, but can we get an understanding that there are two sides to the israeli government...

those that want peace, and those that want genocide, or expulsion of palestinians...


Lol, genocide.
How blind can one be???
All Israel has EVER done is trying to find a way to survive in a world where jews are hated by so many!
You should really check out what Palestines have to say about jews in general before you claim some Israelites want genocide.


Obviously the Gaza sacrifice was a gesture towards peace (unless souljah is right) but was waidely opposed by most of the people and much of the government (understandable)


What Souljah said should not even slightly be taken serious.

The background of this fight is long and complex, but it's not that hard to see who is the general agressor at this point.
What can Israel do, if the Palestinian government does not try to catch palestinian terrorists?

Sit back and watch bomb after bomb blast innocent Israelis?
I fully agree with their pro-active approach.



posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid


But Hammas isn’t a government. It claims to be a militia. They don’t tax people, just take donations for killing.


So, where is the Palisinian gov't? Why aren't they dealing with these people? Like I said both sides



What happened?

Now both sides is Pal gov't versus palestinian terror organisation?

And yes, this happened:

The Hamas has come under heavy palestinian criticism following last Friday's explosion that killed 21 people and injured more than 120. Palestinians have rejected Hamas's claim that Israel was behind the explosion, which occurred when a truck loaded with rockets overturned during a rally. I provided the source of the official Palestinian Government blaming Hamas for this.

I do not want to be unpolite, but I suggest you'd please read the postings within this topic.









[edit on 29-9-2005 by Riwka]



posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong


Obviously the Gaza sacrifice [...] was waidely opposed by most of the people and much of the government (understandable)
.


No.

That is wrong. A clear majority supported the disengagement.

Peace Index / June 2005: Majority still supports disengagement

and

Peace Index / April 2005




[edit on 29-9-2005 by Riwka]



new topics




 
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join