Hezbollywood. Was the Qana collapse staged?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
Oops. Turns out all the "intentional collapse" stuff is BS, the IDF is now admitting they hit the building.



Its been pretty clear from the beginning that Israel hit the building. What is up in the air is the when and why that it collapsed.




posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 10:09 AM
link   
I watched the Anderson Cooper segment and what was said is true the ambulances were staged and he said so right on TV. Signs of desperation if you ask me. Also many of their supporters are now spreading links to videos such as this which shows a girl calling for death to the Jews.

pmw.org.il...

I can only assume they are not very smart since the video is dated in 2000, yet my assumption is they are hoping most people will pay very little attention if any and think it is current.

Knowing the above I think it is very possible that the bombing incident in qana was staged to make it look like Israel did it when in fact they blew it up themselves.



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 10:11 AM
link   
women were planted too eh? the people who were sheltering there were refugees from the fighting elsewhere, women and children, no men, as they stayed to protect their land...
when the bunker buster hit the basement, pretty much everyone would have died within there and the building would have been massively destablised, thats what they do..now, with no relatives around(these were refugees) rescue workers would have been loath to enter an unstable building with very little chance of finding anyone alive, just as they would be in the UK...they would wait until the building had stablised, eg collapsed, to do so.
so why did they pass the bodies around to be photograthed, because they wanted the world to see what had happened maybe???



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 10:12 AM
link   


Your story still doesn't explain away the theory that Hezbollah staged this whole thing (Planting kids and putting missiles around building).


The burden of proof is on the people making the claims, after being on this site for a while you ought to know that.

We know for a fact Israel bombed the building - they've admitted it now. We know for a fact that dead civilians were pulled from the rubble.

So, since the "staged collapse" theory didn't work out, what with Israel admitting they bombed the building, a new exculpatory theory had to be presented for the "true believers": thus the "crippled children" line of disinfo.

Why? Because Israel's supporters don't want to believe the Israelis are responsible for this slaughter. But what you "want to believe" or I "want to believe" doesn't matter - the facts are now quite clear. Click your heels three times... and Israel will still have killed those people.

Hell, I desperately "want to believe" I'll win the lottery tomorrow - want to bet on whether my belief makes any difference?



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex

The burden of proof is on the people making the claims, after being on this site for a while you ought to know that.

dbate backed up the theory with the sources in the original post. Someone made a counter claim and didn't adiquately back it up



We know for a fact Israel bombed the building - they've admitted it now.
What do you mean "now"? That was never in doubt. You're trying to make it sound like a cover up from the beginning. You are twisting the story.



So, since the "staged collapse" theory didn't work out, what with Israel admitting they bombed the building, a new exculpatory theory had to be presented for the "true believers": thus the "crippled children" line of disinfo.
That "theory" is not dead. Treating it like it is won't make it go away. Try again.



Why? Because Israel's supporters don't want to believe the Israelis are responsible for this slaughter. But what you "want to believe" or I "want to believe" doesn't matter - the facts are now quite clear. Click your heels three times... and Israel will


Don't think of me as an Israel supporter, but a Hezzbollah non-supporter. Lots around here talk of people blindly following Israel, but I see more blindly condemning Israel, no matter what.



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 10:55 AM
link   
I'll play Devil's advocate, if you don't mind (even if you do
)



Another mystery is why the people who were in the basement of the building remainder there for seven to eight hours after it was struck.


It occurs to me that perhaps the fact that it was night time complicated matters. The bomb was dropped after dusk, no? And rescue crews appear to have moved in at first light. That seems pretty standard, unless rescuers were equipped with high-powered portable lights and the generator trucks to keep them lit. (They don't have those things, do they? No.)



There are other mysteries. The roof of the building was intact. Journalist Ben Wedeman of CNN noted that there was a larger crater next to the building, but observed that the building appeared not to have collapsed as a result of the Israeli strike.


I read somewhere that a man who claims to have been ejected from the house by the bomb, also claimed that the bomb came in the doorway, not through the roof. Not sure where I read that, or who the man making the statement was connected to, but there may be something to that.



There was little blood, CNN's Wedeman noted: all the victims, he concluded, appeared to have died while as they were sleeping -- sleeping, apparently, through thunderous Israeli air attacks.


What conclusions can you draw from that? Do you think they were poisoned or something, while they slept? As far as the lack of gore in the wake of an explosion, could there be another explanation? Could fine dust kicked up by the explosion combined with the intense heat to create a sort of enamel/powder coat effect? Sounds plausible enough to me, but I'd have to look through a bunch of pictures of victims who died under similar circumstances to be more certain...



It's really odd how the rescue mission didn't start until the morning when the journalist were summoned. Are we really to believe that the survivors would wait for journalist before they started digging for their loved ones?


I think you've passed up a much more logical conclusion in favor of one that fits your theory. As I said before, without the aid of high-powered portable lights and generator trucks, there's nothing to be done until daybreak.

In places without the necessary equipment to keep the lights on during the nightime hours, rescue operations are suspended until dawn. You don't want to go digging through a big pile of shifting rubble in the dark, it's hard enough as it is in the daytime. The goal is to get survivors out, and you can't very well do that if you bring the damaged structure down on their heads because you can't see that the slab of concrete you're struggling to move is actually holding up a section of floor, or whatever.



My personal favorite item in this event is the actor we'll call "Green Helmet Man". This same man is seen in numerous pictures as he holds the bodies of dead children. Over and over again we see this same worker, no doubt just an actor on the payroll of Hezbollah. The real "got-cha" is that someone noted that this same man was seen in the same green helmet back in some 1996 photos.


Now this is very interesting to me. I don't think that it's necessarily an indication that the attack was staged, he could simply be Hezzbollah's media liason, or something similar. Also, consider that even if the photos were staged, that doesn't necessarily mean the attack was also staged - and vice versa. We don't know, we can only speculate.

Still, it's a very, very peculiar facet of this story. It's definitely got my interest...



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Funny, I'm no fan of Hezbollah either, but that doesn't mean I am desparate to look for an excuse for everything the Israelis do. It's entirely possible to condemn both sides.

As for the "sources" - a link to speculation or unconfirmed reports does not constitute "proof" or anything close to it. I could post a blog, claim I'm in Lebanon and I saw Nasrallah gnawing on a freshly dead infant, that doesn't make it true - unless I am desparate to see one side as "good guys" and one side as "bad guys".

IMHO - they're all "bad guys".

[edit on 8/1/06 by xmotex]



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by surrender_dorothy
suggesting that this tragic event was staged is a very cynical view. However interesting it may be I feel that discussing this sort of stuff is somewhat crass.

Each to their own though.



Gee, have you missed the whole 9/11 forum devoted to just that?



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark
Gee, have you missed the whole 9/11 forum devoted to just that?


Exactly! And oddly enough we have another story here that involves explosives being detonated to take down a building with people inside. Yet since Israel is involved we have to automatically say there's no conspiracy to this story at all. Which makes me wonder. I bet there were no Jews in the building when it fell. It had to have been their fault.



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 11:49 AM
link   
Cute tactical ploy, but I think the 9-11 "explosives" stories are bunk & disinfo too.

And, since I presume you are a 9-11 conspiracy skeptic, why are you so eager to embrace this theory, or (it appears) any theory that absolves Israel of responsibility for this attack?

Is it so difficult to believe the IDF is less than flawless and blameless?

[edit on 8/1/06 by xmotex]



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 11:51 AM
link   
My personal thoughts are that the Hezbollah didn't intentionally blow up the building, but fire from the initial Israeli strike spread to a cache of weapons that then took out the buildiing. And Hezbollah is using the tragic event to their best advantage.



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 11:52 AM
link   
Why fire rockets at Israel from an area they knew civilians were at?
How did that 30' professional poster get there in time?
Why did they wait until the press arrived to remove the bodies?

It's disturbing, but these tactics are not unheard of.


I lived until 2002 in a small southern village near Mardshajund that is inhabited by a majority of Shias like me. After Israel left Lebanon, it did not take long for Hezbollah to take have its say in other towns. Received as successful resistance fighters and armed to the teeth, they stored rockets in bunkers in our town as well. The social work of the Party of God consisted in building a school and a residence over these bunkers! A local sheikh explained to me laughing that the Jews would lose in any event because the rockets would either be fired at them or if they attacked the rockets depots, they would be condemned by world opinion on account of the dead civilians. These people do not care about the Lebanese population, they use them as shields, and, once dead, as propaganda. As long as they continue existing there, there will be no tranquility and peace.

Dr. Mounir Herzallah
Berlin-Wedding



Other unthinkable reports discuss the possibility that the bodies may have been trucked in from Tyre. {shudder}

Cynical and unthinkable but not unheard of, so investigating the various possibilities is warranted. Ignoring evidence that an atrocity may be staged is just as unthinkable, No?


Thanks to lieutenant commander data for correcting earlier information.
Is this the video that Sky debunked?



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 12:36 PM
link   
I am a littler bit skeptical about that Letter that Dr. Mounir Herzallah
Berlin-Wedding
has been using to claim that Hezbollah has done things in purpose.

It came to be on 7/30/2006 call me what ever you want but it looks to me just another piece of propaganda.

I can not help to be so skeptical you know.



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex

As for the "sources" - a link to speculation or unconfirmed reports does not constitute "proof" or anything close to it. I could post a blog, claim I'm in Lebanon and I saw Nasrallah gnawing on a freshly dead infant, that doesn't make it true - unless I am desparate to see one side as "good guys" and one side as "bad guys".


But we end up going with the best info that we have, and so far it is from a respected reporter, regardless of whatever bias they may or may not have, they are afforded a certain amount of weight. I've come across many blogs that say what I think, but would never consider using them as sources. Just as I don't discount the images of the dead civilians in Lebanon because I don't like Hez.



IMHO - they're all "bad guys".

Fair enough. That's as objective as anyone can ask, and saying they are all "good guys" is rediculous.

Whether Hez is, or is not, manipulating the situation, I will say that they are crazy if they don't. Much of their fight is waged in the arena of public opinion. It would be blasted stupid of them to not exploit the situation.



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by makeitso
Is this the video that Sky debunked?


After seeing this you can't question why houses and other "non-combat" buildings are bombed. Israel has spy drones all over the place and combat fighters on stand-by. If you fire rockets and hide in a house, expect that house to go Boom! I'd leave if someone was using my house as a military base.



Originally posted by djohnsto77
My personal thoughts are that the Hezbollah didn't intentionally blow up the building, but fire from the initial Israeli strike spread to a cache of weapons that then took out the buildiing.


A very likely scenario. Then why hide women and children in a building you know is stocked with weapons unless you're hoping for a bomb to fall on said building for dramatic effect? No matter how you look at it Hezbollah is using civilians as cannon-fodder for their PR campaign. Arafat taught them well.



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 12:47 PM
link   
The main point in this story is this: did Israel fire a rocket into that building? if they did then they are not innocent. It doesn't matter what else happened, since they are culpable in this situation.



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by makeitso
Why fire rockets at Israel from an area they knew civilians were at?
How did that 30' professional poster get there in time?
Why did they wait until the press arrived to remove the bodies?


There are also some sites surfacing that call into question the various stages of rigor mortis in Qana victims after reviewing footage and pictures, time lapses exceeding four hours in Reuters an AP photos of the same rescuer worker and the same child, ambulances arriving with cameras at the scene…I am not sure about linking some of sites due to the graphic nature…but some of the links can be found in this article.

None-the-less, it does raise questions….

Mg



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by denythestatusquo
The main point in this story is this: did Israel fire a rocket into that building? if they did then they are not innocent. It doesn't matter what else happened, since they are culpable in this situation.


Just the same, if Hezzbollah kept civilians and weapons in the same place, or fired from the same place, they are culpable as well.



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 01:05 PM
link   
I have no doubt that Hezbollah is milking Quana for every bit of sympathy they can get. That in itself doesn't indicate anything but the fact they're smart enough to exploit the propaganda victory the IDF handed them for everything it's worth.



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 03:47 PM
link   
Hezbolla commited an act of war by cross the Israel border and kidnapping the two soliders.

I have no sympathy for hezbello becasue they are getting their butt kicked.

It is unfortunate that civilains are killed but that is an ugly part of war.....civilains always suffer the most. The blame for this fiasco rest in Hezbolla's hands and in proxy Syria & Iran because of the support they provide them.





top topics
 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join