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.

 

UN Report: Israel to blame for UN Building attacks

page: 3
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 6 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
I find this to be pretty telling if the numbers are true. And from the kind of things I have heard the UN say about Israel, I will side that the numbers are correct.


In fact, of over 700 General Assembly resolutions passed since the UN's 1945 establishment, nearly 450 condemn Israel. None have been passed against any Arab country nor any Arab terrorist organizations! In other words, out of 190 nations in the United Nations, over sixty percent of all General Assembly resolutions condemned just ONE member, Israel!


Anyone saying that resolutions against a country are proof of bias against a country makes no more sense than I would I whined that my "warn" was indicative of "anti-kailassa-ism".

Hey, if I get 5 more warnings, should I report that to the IDL and get them to threaten the people "persecuting" me? After all, it can never be one's own fault if someone objects to one's behaviour!




posted on May, 6 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
reply to post by searching4truth
 


Border- Does Israel not have the right to control its borders and who it allows in?

Was Egypt condemned for closing their side of the border and not allowing food into Gaza?

My point is very simple. Condemn Israel if they are really responsible but judge others by the same sword. Hold the PLO and Hamas accountable for the terrorist that are freely running loose in their backyard. Quit saying Israel this, Israel that and then poor Palestinians. Condemn Egypt for its role in food not getting food through. Making it one sided IMO is a vendetta.


Israel has every right to protect its borders. But let me ask you then how does a nation protect its borders when Gaza lies within its borders? Now, you're probably going to say something to effect of "Gaza has its own government----Hamas". Fair enough, but 1. they are not a nation 2. Israel claims authority of the air over Gaza and the water beside it. They are not allowed to export anything, even if they had anything to export they can't, and anything brought into it is severly restricted by Israel. Basic goods only, which ironicly has never been defined by Israel, but apparantly the UN can get in most food, cleaning supplies, and medicine, yet not enough to sustain the population. Basic services ie, water, electricity, sewage systems are poor even when they are working. It is a humanitarian crisis, there is no way around it and no way to defend it.

As for Egypt, yes I find that outrageous that they would not allow goods through, but this thread is regarding Israel. But for your enjoyment here is an article that shows that people were equally as outraged with Egypts actions. www.ibtimes.com...

What I do remember is a ship attempting to bring aid to Gaza was destroyed by Israel, the ship was destroyed, but since Israel denies it I guess it didn't happen? It must have somehow destroyed itself.
www.huffingtonpost.com...



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 



No... It's true. Arafat rejected peace. He was a mass murdering pedophile and he rejected a fantastic peace plan that gave them nearly eveyrthing they had been whining about.


This is an excerpt from an article by Robert Hirst reporting from the Middle East.

"In the first place it was not Arafat who blew up Camp David. Robert Malley, Clinton's adviser at the conference, and others have long since exhaustively debunked this for the almost ludicrously partisan myth it was. In their view, Barak himself contributed more to the collapse than Arafat.

And now comes Malka, the former intelligence chief, who flatly asserts that the evaluations of Arafat's intentions and actions on which Barak, and later Sharon, relied were "erroneous", and deliberately so. They were the handiwork of one man, who occupied a key position in the Israeli policy-making process: Amos Gilad, the head of the military intelligence research department. He presented "national security assessments" to the government. Crucially, he only did so orally, because, as he put it, "they [ministers] don't read".

But even more crucially, according to Malka, his oral reports were at variance with the written ones of his bureau, an inconsistency he made good by "retroactively rewriting them". For these written reports just couldn't support what, via his misrepresentations, became the orthodox, highly negative view of Arafat."

The full article here:
www.fromoccupiedpalestine.org...

Hope that puts an end to the spate of misinformation and character assasination.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 12:02 AM
link   
hi guys, first post


i think wether pro israeli, pro palestine or just neutral, what the real truth is, is power, and domination, and israel is the dominant, more tech savy and richer force in this situation so for the pro israeli factions you need to think about the victims of rampage, because you can no longer be the victims.
For the pro palestinians they need to show a tact that, in the western media, that shows they are not terrorist, its hard to do in pro western government who support israel but can be achieved and for the neutral, well i guess just stay positive peace can be achived even though somehow the most powerful people end up behaving like ...

silly kids like a skinny kid who sits down next to another skinny kid n says "i wanna eat" and the other says "so do i" n the other skinny kid says "yeh but ur sandwich looks better, give it to me" so the skinny kid by the window says " well u can sit here but dont take the micky now" n then he says "i want it" so skinny kids (2) mates says "leave it, ur sandwich is aright" n he tells them to go away so after a few mins of arguments skinny kid (1) (by the window) mates get involved, skinny kid 2 beats them up n skinny kid 1 gets scared n skinny kid 2 takes skinny kids 1's apple, n his juice now wants his sandwich, skinny kid (1) is getting fed up of the constant harrasment so starts sayin annoyin things to him n pushing him away from his pack lunch so skinny kid 2 keeps running up to the teacher sayin he keeps pokin me on my knee, bus is full, so teacher says find a way to solve it, how about be friends and share, but now both hate each other they'll end up sittin in silence n then a huge fight where skinny kid 2 will kill skinny kid 1 and then prison. a lesson learnt.

lol if u understood that......


either way, UN evidence points to israel wrong doings, the country and its supporters loose 10x more credibility when not humble enough to admit there wrong doings.

also a question, if palestine was regognised as a state/country and west bank with the national palestinian movement abosorbed hamas would they both be regognised as a terrorist group, are they both terrorist movements
fatah n hamas?? or if similar question, if palestine was ever created and hamas ruled, would they still be terrorists??
would appreciate a view on that.

i hope i did in mods view participate in someway which is not off topic, it was presented to all, with a symbol of innocent childishness to there behaviour but kids can be crule as they say, an opinion on the situation and some questions.

sach



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 03:53 AM
link   
reply to post by skandaa
 

Honestly, sach, I pretty much blacked out reading your analogy :S

For your second question yes they would still be called terrorists. Countries can be labelled terrorist, or at least 'harbourers of terrorists', like N. Korea, Iran, Pakistan, etc.
But it really comes down to whether or not a country is useful to the powerfull elite, and the rich, whoever does not as they please will be called the enemy.
If HAMAS suddenly turned pro-Israeli, started following US foreign policy, started firing rockets at America's enemies, it wouldnt matter what atrocities they committed, they would not be called terrorists.

It's not what ya do, its who you do it to.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 05:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by searching4truth
Does pointing out that Israel, at times, does not allow food into Gaza, cuts water and electricity, does not allow people through check points for work and schooling, etc.


hmmm .. and why does Isreal do this? Because when the borders are open, the Palestinian terrorists come through with bombs to blow up Israeli citizens. If the Palestinians behaved themselves, they'd be welcome into Israel.

Boatloads of 'food and medicine' that were going into Gaza many times turn out to be boatloads of illegal arms and ammunitions to be used against Israeli civilians. OF COURSE Israel will stop boats from going into Gaza. The Palestinians, once again, have proven that they can't be trusted.

BTW ... EGYPT closed the border with Gaza as well because the so called Palestinians were such trouble makers in Egypt.

Considering that the so called 'palestinians' are really from Syria, Egypt and mostly Jordan ... they should all go home (but of course those countries don't want them back ... they behave so badly ... Black September in Jordan ring a bell?)



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 06:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by A Conscience
Hope that puts an end to the spate of misinformation and character assasination.

Arafat was an EGYPTIAN who was a mass murdering pedophile.
That's the truth.
He could have ended the bloodshed. Peace was offered twice.
(peace was offered to roaming terrorist thugs. Unfreak'nbelievable! :shk: )
He rejected it.

Arafat wanted all the land back from before the 1967 war.
That is insane.
Israel, a soverign nation, was attacked and therefore attacked back.
The attackers lost land DUE TO THEIR OWN AGGRESSION.
Israel was under no obligation to give that land back.
The attackers lost it through their own pathetic attempt to destroy Israel.
Israel won the war against them. They should keep the land. Period.

It's a good lesson for those attackers not to try to destroy a soverign country. If the land is given back to the attackers then they learn nothing except that they can keep trying and trying .... with no consequences.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 



Arafat was an EGYPTIAN who was a mass murdering pedophile.
That's the truth.
He could have ended the bloodshed. Peace was offered twice.
(peace was offered to roaming terrorist thugs. Unfreak'nbelievable! )
He rejected it.
Arafat wanted all the land back from before the 1967 war.
That is insane.
Israel, a soverign nation, was attacked and therefore attacked back.
The attackers lost land DUE TO THEIR OWN AGGRESSION.
Israel was under no obligation to give that land back.
The attackers lost it through their own pathetic attempt to destroy Israel.
Israel won the war against them. They should keep the land. Period.


How about some real truth for once, instead of manufactured ones like those you have been spewing! It seems the ones that did most of the mass murder are the ones you are defending. This is based on historical fact.

The state of Israel was created out of a successful ethnic cleansing operation.

If the perpetrators of former Yugoslavia are being charged with war crimes and ethnic cleansing, I wonder why the Israelis are getting away with it.


"In between December 1947 and well into the 1950s, the ethnic cleansing operation continued. Villages were surrounded from three flanks and the fourth one was left open for flight and evacuation. In some cases it did not work, and many villagers remained in the houses—here is where massacres took place. This was the principal strategy of the Judaization of Palestine.

The ethnic cleansing took place in three stages. The first one was from December 1947 until the end of the summer of 1948, when Palestinian villages along the coastal and inner plains were destroyed and their population evicted by force. The second stage took place in the autumn and winter of 1948/9 and included the Galilee and the Naqab (Negev).

By the winter of 1949 the guns were silenced on the land of Palestine. The second phase of the war ended and with it the second stage of the cleansing terminated, but the expulsion continued long after the winds of war subsided.

The third phase was to extend beyond the war until 1954, when dozens of additional villages were destroyed and their residents expelled. Out of about 900,000 Palestinians living in the territories designated by the U.N. as a Jewish state, only 100,000 remained on or nearby their land and houses. Those who remained became the Palestinian minority in Israel. The rest were expelled or fled under threat of expulsion; a few thousand died in massacres."
(Source: State of Denial: Israel, 1948-2008
by: Ilan PapThe Link - Volume 41, Issue 2)

“The Israeli forces expelled the Palestinians from every village and town they occupied. In some cases, this expulsion was accompanied by massacres of civilians as was the case in Lydda, Ramleh, Dawimiyya, Sa’sa, Ein Zietun and other places. Expulsion also accompanied by rape, looting and confiscation”.
(Source:Jewish historian Ilan Pappe, in his book “The Link”)


What went on in Palestine constitutes as one of the most tragic war crime to be perpetrated on a population in the 20th century and continuing into the 21st century. The process is still on going.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 12:41 PM
link   
reply to post by skandaa
 


also a question, if palestine was regognised as a state/country and west bank with the national palestinian movement abosorbed hamas would they both be regognised as a terrorist group, are they both terrorist movements
fatah n hamas?? or if similar question, if palestine was ever created and hamas ruled, would they still be terrorists??
would appreciate a view on that.

First, welcome!!!!

Now, as for your question it is pretty complex on many levels. First, Hamas only has authority in the Gaza. So, I'll assume that everyone got together and Hamas now has authority over both. It could be viewed as an illegitimate terrorist government, ie the Taliban, and not have international support. There are many countries that were formed by "terrorists" remember one man's terrorist is another man "freedom fighter", just depends on who wins as how history and future generations will view it. I mean, honestly, when Israel was forming Britian at one point labeled the Haganah group as terrorist, but when Israel claimed independance this very group was now the IDF. So, in Israel's instance the "change" was successful.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by A Conscience
Hope that puts an end to the spate of misinformation and character assasination.

Arafat was an EGYPTIAN who was a mass murdering pedophile.
That's the truth.
He could have ended the bloodshed. Peace was offered twice.
(peace was offered to roaming terrorist thugs. Unfreak'nbelievable! :shk: )
He rejected it.

Arafat wanted all the land back from before the 1967 war.
That is insane.
Israel, a soverign nation, was attacked and therefore attacked back.
The attackers lost land DUE TO THEIR OWN AGGRESSION.
Israel was under no obligation to give that land back.
The attackers lost it through their own pathetic attempt to destroy Israel.
Israel won the war against them. They should keep the land. Period.

It's a good lesson for those attackers not to try to destroy a soverign country. If the land is given back to the attackers then they learn nothing except that they can keep trying and trying .... with no consequences.



You have no proof or source that Arafat was a pedophile, so I think its time to cease that accusation. As for being a "mass murderer" the same claim can be made in regard to Ben-Gurion, I mean if we want to go bringing up old information, and by the same logic all current Israeli acts of aggression are his fault as well, right? By any international standard all acts of agression by the future Israeli's committed prior to 1947 are acts of terrorism, despite its overnight metamorphasis into a "standing army". From 1919-1939 alone, they were responsible for the deaths of 50,000 Palastinian Arabs, more than 100,000 Arab nationalists were imprisioned or put into, oh now is that place called, right concentration camps. The "future Israeli's" also rejected peace a number of times as well, how about the original proposition of the General Assembly in early '48 which called for a seperate state for both the Arabs and the Jews and an international zone for Jerusalem and Bethlehem. Rejected. Yet, wouldn't everyone involved be in a much better position today? Or what about even after the Haganah claimed to be the new army, the IDF and opposed terrorism (both Jewish and Arab) they continued to blow up Iraqi oil pipelines in Haifa, or the bombing of the King David Hotel, or the various times they simply barged into homes, rounded people up, and slaughtered them. Do you honestly expect me to believe that an "army" that was founded on and practiced such brutal acts of savagery had made an complete about face and is currently the ultimate victim? Sorry, the facts do not support that stance.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join