Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Israeli Commando: 'We Had No Choice': (I beleive this guy more than anyone else)

page: 18
79
<< 15  16  17    19  20 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by kdial1

Originally posted by madhadder545
reply to post by Essan
 


Its very simple Isreal set up a blockade. That means you cant go through it, but they choose to do it putting Isreal in situation they probably didnt want. The boat started it bye passing the blockade. Isreal responded. They just wanted to take control of the boat or stop it. Then they start getting bashed in there heads and what would you do? the exact same thing. "fight for your life" if they just wanted to kill there would have been alot more blood



So by your logic reverse the current situation, imagine Israel was the one that had a blockade against them denying aid into their country without first going to Palestine to make sure there was no building materials or weapons.

And I will quote you


what would you do? the exact same thing. "fight for your life" if they just wanted to kill there would have been alot more blood


Guess what! Palestine is fighting for their life! They are humans just like us, they have every right to get aid and building materials after Israel leveled the strip. Take a look on Googlemaps satellite view.

I just want what everyone else wants in this world and that is Peace in the Middle east!!

I hope I see it in my lifetime, all countries governements should be making this their #1 agenda. Something has to be done with Israel and Palestine or otherwise it is just going to get worse.

-Kdial1



Kdial1, you're wasting tendon power by trying to respond to such an asinine comment made by madhadder. There's a reason why he chose his avatar name, and it greatly shows by his comment.

He's obviously not aware, or is in denial that the Israelis were already firing on the boat before they had ever even entered it...IN INTERNATIONAL WATERS NO LESS.

www.thenewstribune.com...

An Al-Jazeera reporter on one of the Turkish ships said the Israelis fired at the vessel before boarding it. The Israelis, who had declared they would not let the ships reach Gaza, said they only opened fire after being attacked by activists with sticks, knives and live fire from weapons seized from the Israeli commandos

Read more: www.thenewstribune.com...


And interestingly, Israel is quite adamant about not letting reporters in so that they can get "THE REAL STORY" about what happened.
www.salon.com...

Evidence that Israel fired on the ship before entrance. This particular reporter brought forth EVIDENCE of this.
rawstory.com...

Not to mention, that this act happened in INTERNATIONAL waters, and the above link provides that information. Therefore, Israel was completely in the WRONG regardless.

This is in international waters, not Israeli waters, not in the 68-mile exclusion zone. We are being attacked in international waters completely illegally."


Here's a youtube video of that, which is also provided in the above link:
www.youtube.com...#!

Starts off in Arabic and then goes to English.

So, thanks for fighting the good fight kdial1. We need more good people like yourself. Ignore those who take the side of evil. One day, they'll be dealt with as well. KARMA always returns the favor.




posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
 


You cannot provide an argument without resorting to personal attacks?


Well, you didn't provide an argument at all. This post is off-topic and should probably be removed.

Now, as far as being ON TOPIC, check all the links that I have already provided on this page.

Thanks for your response.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by anon72
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
 



I know, it sucks. You probably have a horribly obese wife, 2 kids that don't listen to you who sit and play video games all day and is probably failing out of the first grade, so the only action you get to see is the keyboard in front of you where you can play armchair hero to the rest of these forum crowds who might believe your delusional ranting. I guess you got to get attention somewhere.


Was that really needed? You were doing well with out it.

I think you owe an apology. IMO.

Be the better person.




Well now...How about this. I will apologize to you since you seem offended, however, I will NOT apologize to someone who attacked a post of mine using ignorance and sarcasm in place of intelligent debate and sources. This stuff that is happening around the world is REAL and people are dying as a result. We have serious problems with the way that this country thinks and enforces foreign policy. We have civilians who support this madness wholeheartedly and it does not seem like things are going to change anytime soon. The time for being nice has about ended. Look around and see what is happening to our world. I've placated ignorance for far too long, and I notice that my initial attempt at intelligent debate was scoffed at without sources or intellect to back their very ignorant statements. As you ask for my apology to a person who lacks common respect for the opinions of others, Our country is losing respect from the international community because of our choices of allies (Israel), we're going bankrupt because of our choices of bankers (Israel), and we now have one of the worst environmental disasters in the history of the world (oil spill).

It's about time for action, and let me tell you, politeness has gotten us nowhere in the grand scheme of things. We politely sit back and wait for BP to clean up their abomination in our back yard. We politely sit back and wait for our country to quit declaring war on the rest of the world and supporting sociopathic countries like Israel. We politely let our politicians litigate against our rights and throw us out of our homes because we can't pay our mortgages due to the financial crisis that they put us into. We politely allow them to wiretap us at will and politely let cops taser us, shoot us, and throw us in jail when they won't even ADDRESS the illegal immigration issue (You and I can be arrested for smoking a joint, meanwhile our borders are being overrun by the same people who bring the marijuana in and are allowed to operate with impunity). And then we have GUNG HO citizens of this SAME COUNTRY of ours who support and back anything that these psychopaths do to us.

When is it time to finally act and quit being polite??? You tell me...

And no, I'm not for "armed revolution," nor do I believe in militias. However, I do believe in direct action and finally standing up for a cause. This stuff is getting out of hand, and yet, we still have people who blindly follow the itinerary of the current political structure. For now it seems, the only end to this will be when all of it finally ends us as a civilization permanently.

[edit on 6-6-2010 by EvolvedMinistry]



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
 


Well, I was waiting on Skellon to reply to this post, as it was a post directed at him, but since you saw fit to aim it at me as well, I suppose it's fair game for me too, now.

You have misrepresented nearly every one of those articles. Nearly every one. Yup, I read 'em - just to see if what you had there could 'straighten me out'. Nope.

Article one

You said:

The Irish challenging Israeli aggression, because they knew who's fault it was.


Nothing of the kind. It was a story about an Irish activist, among many other nationalities, aboard the Rachel Corrie (US flagged vessel, I believe), not any sort of Irish national response, as you implied. We all already KNEW Maire was aboard. It's about an activist response, not an Irish one.

Byline was

By PATRICK COOPER, IrishCentral.com Staff Writer
NOT AP, as you insinuated.

Article two

You said:

Hmmm, what's this??? An ex-Mossad agent downing Israel for their actions.


This article was actually pretty close to what you said it was. one man's opinion of the military actions of the day. He had some valid points, but in the end, it was still opinion, perhaps a bit more informed than most. You should check out some of his other work - it appears to be right down your alley. Some of it is posted online, in it's entirety.

Byline was:

By Stephen C. Webster
Tuesday, June 1st, 2010 -- 10:53 pm


Again, NOT AP, as you insinuated. Matter of fact, there is no attribution there at all, other than the author's name. Either the parent organization was so ashamed of that story they wouldn't allow attribution to them, or he's just freelance. Still not AP, though.

Article three

You said:

Gee...what's this??? Israel wants a rejection on an independent investigation. I wonder why???


I actually have to wonder if you read that story yourself, or just saw the headline, and thought you could spin it up. You really ought to read it, it's not too bad. That particular issue is subject of another thread at ATS, and I've already commented on it there. If you really have to wonder why, I reckon you're even less cerebral than I initially gave you credit for.

Byline on that one is:

By Agence France-Presse
Wednesday, June 2nd, 2010 -- 12:02 am


STILL not AP, as you so forcefully tried to insist in your post.

Article four

You said:

Wow...Egypt lifts a blockade to the Gaza strip because of Israeli violence and aggression. Hmmm...seems like the rest of the world is going on the same information that I have. Why is no one going on the information that you have??? Could it be because YOU HAVE NO INFORMATION?


Didn't you read that one, either? It said Egypt is TEMPORARILY opening one border crossing, in one town, for a few days, as a response. That's hardly lifting a blockade. I would have thought the Huffington post could have found something stronger to support their agenda, but I guess not. Hmmm...

Byline on that one WAS AP. Congrats.

Article five

You said:

Oh...Lookey here!!! This just in. Many of Israel's allies have frozen their ties. But, I guess your information says something different. Planet earth to WHO AGAIN???


That article states that two countries - Turkey and Greece- have cancelled planned joint military exercises. Two countries. Joint MILITARY EXERCISES. Not quite "freezing ties". The rest of the article details loud condemnation from arab countries. Is that really a surprise to you? If it is, you should get out more. Was the Turkish military exercise cancellation really a surprise? Hardly ground shaking stuff there.

Byline there was

By Agence France-Presse
Monday, May 31st, 2010 -- 9:42 am


Again, NOT AP, as you claimed.

Article six

You said:

WOW...It looks like a bunch of reporters SAW exactly what happened. OH, um, where's your info again???


Byline for that one is

By Stephen C. Webster
Monday, May 31st, 2010 -- 6:49 pm
same as Article two you posted, and STILL not AP per your claim.

A pertinent part of the article (which, again, I think you failed to actually read) is this:

However, in raw video captured by an Al Jazeera producer and published to YouTube late Monday, two journalists provide a play-by-play of the harrowing event as pops and cracks echo in the background. Even before the Israeli forces were aboard, one says, they were pelting the boat with tear gas and stun grenades, injuring numerous people.

Then he confirms the first death, saying the individual was killed by "munitions," but not specifying whether it was a bullet or something else. Then he confirms that Israeli forces were boarding the ship.

Another of the reporters featured in the video works for the Iranian network Press TV. "We are being hit by tear gas, stun grenades, we have navy ships on either side, helicopters overhead," he said. "We are being attacked from every single side. This is in international waters, not Israeli waters, not in the 68-mile exclusion zone. We are being attacked in international waters completely illegally."


Notice that the first 'reporter' (actually a producer) is from al-Jazeera, in direct contravention to what you said in the same post, here:

No Al Jazeera here.


The second is from Iranian Press TV. Hardly 'unbiased', in either case.

If those articles are the best you can come up with, and then you have to misrepresent them to boot, it's hardly a convincing argument.

I Do have to give you credit for something, though. You also said, in the same post:

Some of us do our homework. Others of us (um cough...Skellon) sits and does nothing whatsoever and bases everything that they know off of what mommy and daddy told them when they were young.
and then proceeded to give us a beautiful illustration of just how that works.

Kudos!

The rest of the post is attempted insult, bluster, and foolish bravado (considering what you tried to back it up with), and doesn't warrant considered response.

Thanks for playing, kid! Better luck next time!

Edit: two pesky spelling errors. Better than my average!

[edit on 2010/6/6 by nenothtu]



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
 


Well, I was waiting on Skellon to reply to this post, as it was a post directed at him, but since you saw fit to aim it at me as well, I suppose it's fair game for me too, now.

You have misrepresented nearly every one of those articles. Nearly every one. Yup, I read 'em - just to see if what you had there could 'straighten me out'. Nope.

Article one

You said:

The Irish challenging Israeli aggression, because they knew who's fault it was.


Nothing of the kind. It was a story about an Irish activist, among many other nationalities, aboard the Rachel Corrie (US flagged vessel, I believe), not any sort of Irish national response, as you implied. We all already KNEW Maire was aboard. It's about an activist response, not an Irish one.

Byline was

By PATRICK COOPER, IrishCentral.com Staff Writer
NOT AP, as you insinuated.

Article two

You said:

Hmmm, what's this??? An ex-Mossad agent downing Israel for their actions.


This article was actually pretty close to what you said it was. one man's opinion of the military actions of the day. He had some valid points, but in the end, it was still opinion, perhaps a bit more informed than most. You should check out some of his other work - it appears to be right down your alley. Some of it is posted online, in it's entirety.

Byline was:

By Stephen C. Webster
Tuesday, June 1st, 2010 -- 10:53 pm


Again, NOT AP, as you insinuated. Matter of fact, there is no attribution there at all, other than the author's name. Either the parent organization was so ashamed of that story they wouldn't allow attribution to the, or he's just freelance. Still not AP, though.

Article three

You said:

Gee...what's this??? Israel wants a rejection on an independent investigation. I wonder why???


I actually have to wonder if you read that story yourself, or just saw the headline, and thought you could spin it up. You really ought to read it, it's not too bad. That particular issue is subject of another thread at ATS, and I've already commented on it there. If you really have to wonder why, I reckon you're even less cerebral than I initially gave you credit for.

Byline on that one is:

By Agence France-Presse
Wednesday, June 2nd, 2010 -- 12:02 am


STILL not AP, as you so forcefully tried to insist in your post.

Article four

You said:

Wow...Egypt lifts a blockade to the Gaza strip because of Israeli violence and aggression. Hmmm...seems like the rest of the world is going on the same information that I have. Why is no one going on the information that you have??? Could it be because YOU HAVE NO INFORMATION?


Didn't you read that one, either? It said Egypt is TEMPORARILY opening one border crossing, in one town, for a few days, as a response. That's hardly lifting a blockade. I would have thought the Huffington post could have found something stronger to support their agenda, but I guess not. Hmmm...

Byline on that one WAS AP. Congrats.

Article five

You said:

Oh...Lookey here!!! This just in. Many of Israel's allies have frozen their ties. But, I guess your information says something different. Planet earth to WHO AGAIN???


That article states that two countries - Turkey and Greece- have cancelled planned joint military exercises. Two countries. Joint MILITARY EXERCISES. Not quite "freezing ties". The rest of the article details loud condemnation from arab countries. Is that really a surprise to you? If it is, you should get out more. Was the Turkish military exercise cancellation really a surprise? Hardly ground shaking stuff there.

Byline there was

By Agence France-Presse
Monday, May 31st, 2010 -- 9:42 am


Again, NOT AP, as you claimed.

Article six

You said:

WOW...It looks like a bunch of reporters SAW exactly what happened. OH, um, where's your info again???


Byline for that one is

By Stephen C. Webster
Monday, May 31st, 2010 -- 6:49 pm
same as Article two you posted, and STILL not AP per your claim.

A pertinent part of the article (which, again, I think you failed to actually read) is this:

However, in raw video captured by an Al Jazeera producer and published to YouTube late Monday, two journalists provide a play-by-play of the harrowing event as pops and cracks echo in the background. Even before the Israeli forces were aboard, one says, they were pelting the boat with tear gas and stun grenades, injuring numerous people.

Then he confirms the first death, saying the individual was killed by "munitions," but not specifying whether it was a bullet or something else. Then he confirms that Israeli forces were boarding the ship.

Another of the reporters featured in the video works for the Iranian network Press TV. "We are being hit by tear gas, stun grenades, we have navy ships on either side, helicopters overhead," he said. "We are being attacked from every single side. This is in international waters, not Israeli waters, not in the 68-mile exclusion zone. We are being attacked in international waters completely illegally."


Notice that the first 'reporter' (actually a producer) is from al-Jazeera, in direct contravention to what you said in the same post, here:

No Al Jazeera here.


The second is from Iranian Press TV. Hardly 'unbiased', in either case.

If those articles are the best you can come up with, and then you have to misrepresent them too boot, it's hardly a convincing argument.

I Do have to give you credit for something, though. You also said, in the same post:

Some of us do our homework. Others of us (um cough...Skellon) sits and does nothing whatsoever and bases everything that they know off of what mommy and daddy told them when they were young.
and then proceeded to give us a beautiful illustration of just how that works.

Kudos!

The rest of the post is attempted insult, bluster, and foolish bravado (considering what you tried to back it up with), and doesn't warrant considered response.

Thanks for playing, kid! Better luck next time!


The voice of the weak. Misrepresented the articles...I love it when people say that nonsense. You didn't even read a single one of them. And how do I know that...because of the amount of time it took you to respond to them. And by the way...I wasn't playing. But evidently...YOU WERE.

And I'm still waiting for one link, one source, or a letter from your mother to back a single opinion that you have given.

Play time is over youngster.

Bye now.

[edit on 6-6-2010 by EvolvedMinistry]



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 08:13 PM
link   
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
 


Nonsense, eh? Surely you can come up with better than that.

Yeah, I read them, and what's more, I summarized them to prove it. I don't expect ANYONE to take my word for it. That's why I re-linked each one - so folks could go read them themselves, and THEY can determine who read them and who didn't. Matter of fact, I read them a couple of hours ago, the first time you posted them, then went out for a cup of coffee and came back. Yeah, I had plenty of time to read them and mull it over.

Frankly, you can't even keep this exchange interesting. Give me something worthy of debate, and I'll come back. Otherwise, I'm done with you and your attempted insults in lieu of reasoned debate.

I'll let the other readers puzzle over it, read your articles and both our commentaries thereon, and figure it out.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 08:19 PM
link   
ummm
for those that think Israel is in the right let me ask you

How come they won't release more than a damn minute of the tape?
that's pathetic and some people defend them nonetheless?

Imagine if muslims borded an american ship and "defended" themselves, later on the international community blasts them and what they do in response is release extremely small portions of the video tape.

They also won't allow an independant investigation.

But let's believe them when they say "They had no choice"??????



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
ummm
for those that think Israel is in the right let me ask you

How come they won't release more than a damn minute of the tape?
that's pathetic and some people defend them nonetheless?


Stuff like this tends to happen suddenly and be over fairly quickly, so there may not be all that much tape to release that's actually pertinent. Another consideration is that it may contain operational procedures shown, which they would prefer not to have fall into the hands of the opposition, which would allow them to prepare for or develop countermeasures to.

Yet another possibility is that there IS something to hide. I can't discount that as a possibility, just saying that it's not the ONLY possibility.



Imagine if muslims borded an american ship and "defended" themselves, later on the international community blasts them and what they do in response is release extremely small portions of the video tape.


This hypothetical needs fleshing out for proper answer. Are we assuming a 'muslim' blockade is in place, and has been announced? Is the American ship US Navy, or private blockade runners? Has it clearly stated that it's intent is to run the blockade? Have the 'muslims' (have to keep putting that in quotes, since 'muslim' is a religion, not a sovereign nation) repeatedly warned this vessel NOT to attempt what they said they intended, and to divert for inspection instead?

At this point, that hypothetical is too vague and open for proper response.



They also won't allow an independant investigation.


Can't say that I blame them. The issue is pretty polarizing. Who do you propose to head this 'independent' investigation?



But let's believe them when they say "They had no choice"??????


In the absence of verifiable evidence otherwise, I have to believe them. The 'choice' seems to have been fairly clearly forced upon them by the stated goals of the blockade runners, as well as the video of improvised, but clearly pre-planned weapons in play on the part of the blockade runners. I say 'pre-planned', because cutting down handrails and cutting them to length isn't a spur-of-the-moment operation, to be accomplished in a few seconds as Israelis storm aboard. Yessir, it appears to me to have been a premeditated thing.

I'm not aware of whether or not ski masks, gas masks, ballistic vests, night vision equipment, and rifle scopes are part of a standard civilian cargo ship's equipment in the Mediterranean. They might be, but it seems strange to me if they are.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 08:56 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Excellent replies Sir.

And as far as releasing more etc. Remember, they don't have to release anything. Anything they do release will just get ripped to sherds-well like in here.

Most people here and in the world don't care about the truth and justice for Israel-just their destruction. Base on religion and that belief.

They better hope there isn't a God whol decides to come on down and start kicking some butt (again).



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by anon72
 


That's really all I ask - for factual evidence, and reasoned logic to prevail over emotional appeals. The emotional appeals, from BOTH sides ("mercenaries!" and "murderers!" and such like emotionally charged catch phrases) actually get in the way of any sort of fact finding, and cloud the issue rather than clarify it.

This is why I've asked, on more than one occasion in this thread alone, for someone, ANYONE, making these emotion laden appeals to cite a relevant law backing up allegations of 'murder', or 'piracy' or such. So far, no one has been able to produce that. Strangely, the emotional charges just roll on, heedless. A particularly pointed example is the claims of an 'illegal' blockade. If it's truly 'illegal', there should be a law to cite, which has been broken. Without breaking a law, how is it 'illegal'? Same goes for ALL the claims of 'illegal' this and 'illegal' that.

It DOES help me in solidifying my suspicions that this is the case, however. Law is not a simple thing, and can be debated, assuming one cares enough to present the laws in question. Emotional appeals are not, and are not subject to logical counters in a debate.

I strongly suspect that why we see so much of it. I'll say it again - long on emotion, short on fact.

[edit on 2010/6/6 by nenothtu]



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
 


Your best shot at posting factual information was still just peoples opinion, emotion and hearsay.



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 02:01 PM
link   
I don't know about you but:

The ship stated it was going to break the blockade.

The other 5 ships submitted to Israeli inspection.

The Video clearly shows Armed "non-armed peaceful civilians" attacking the commando's. Israeli commandos had gun wounds, some from their own stolen pistols and some from "other" firearms. To me that doesn't translate into unarmed civilians.

Israel is enforcing a maritime blockade of Gaza, as was Egypt. You may say it's illegal, nonetheless those two countries were enforcing such a blockade with military force. Try to run it at your risk.

If you are going to crash a blockade, you should expect a response from those blockading.

If that ship's captain ignored the requests for inspection, they would be running the blockade. You need to expect consequences for running a blockade and after attacking a boarding party.

The ship could have easily delivered the supplies to Gaza by using the protocol that was in place. They tried to crash the blockade.



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
 


Nonsense, eh? Surely you can come up with better than that.

Yeah, I read them, and what's more, I summarized them to prove it. I don't expect ANYONE to take my word for it. That's why I re-linked each one - so folks could go read them themselves, and THEY can determine who read them and who didn't. Matter of fact, I read them a couple of hours ago, the first time you posted them, then went out for a cup of coffee and came back. Yeah, I had plenty of time to read them and mull it over.

Frankly, you can't even keep this exchange interesting. Give me something worthy of debate, and I'll come back. Otherwise, I'm done with you and your attempted insults in lieu of reasoned debate.

I'll let the other readers puzzle over it, read your articles and both our commentaries thereon, and figure it out.


Interesting??? Keep this interesting??? LOL. It seems interesting enough for you to consistently answer with conjecture and a complete lack of source to back any opinion that you might have. In academia, your argument is classic for the term "Null and Void," It lacks any merit or substantial evidence to even be considered and opinion. By the way...what was your opinion again??? I don't think we ever really found that out...did we??? Please provide sources, or drop the routine. If you say Israel was in the right...Provide sources. If you say that they were attacked...Provide Proof. This is what will separate the men from the ants. And clearly you represent the latter.

However, we'll see how it all plays out. Won't we??? Just provide ONE SOURCE, or at least a letter from your mother that clearly shows that Israel was in the right. I'll wait for that for awhile I'm sure...probably indefinitely. But, I'm sure you'll come back with another "OPINION, and an attempt to defend your position with an attempt of BIG WORDS and clever little insults to hide the fact that you have NO PROOF for your side of the argument. That works in grade school, but not the real world.

And no, you didn't read the articles. You did a quick skim like most people do, and then chose the parts that best suited your opinion and responded. Hence, YOUR "misrepresentation" of the articles. You can fool others of your shallow line of thinking, but definitely not me. Unless, of course, you're the fastest reader in the history of mankind. I highly doubt it though. Judging by your responses that reads barely above 10th grade level, it would have taken you an hour to read the first link. Nonetheless, the amount of time it took you to respond from the time that I posted the links, informs me that you didn't read anything whatsoever. And then came back with...Uh, you misrepresented the articles." But, anyone who had read them in the first place would be able to see right through your responses to me. But things are definitely in favor for you...you want to know why??? The average reading level for most Americans falls right in the 5th grade average (fact), so, you seem like a GOD to the people supporting you because you're reading level is roughly 5 grades beyond them. SO, most of these people who keep starring you, are reading your opinions of my posts ( Opinions that they agree with because of their inability to read or think for themselves), but not the articles themselves, or the facts contained therein. Its the movie "Idiocracy" all over again except played out in REAL TIME.

"Fool me once...Um. The point is... Well, You can't fool us again."

So, as far as I'm concerned, you fit the bill of many who believe the rantings of the current administration and probably the last one as well. You probably actually thought that Iraq had something to do with 911. Am I wrong??? Don't answer that...I'll simply lose even further respect for your lack of PROOF behind your silly opinions, or critical thought.

PROOF. Show me PROOF that Israel was in the RIGHT. Show me proof that they were attacked before they attacked.

Until then, I will have to say this. 9 dead, 20 or more injured without a single casualty on the Israeli side, and all sorts of eye witnesses from all walks of life who ALL agree that Israel was the aggressor. This includes Europeans who were formerly allies of Israel. You might want to look at the LINK that states that most of Israel's allies have pulled away from them. FACT...Not conjecture. Yep, Israel is pretty unpopular right now. I WONDER WHY??? I guess its because, YOU"RE RIGHT (LOL) and I'm WRONG. (sarcasm) Its a shame I actually had to put a disclaimer there, because you probably would have taken it literally.

Over and out little one.

Much love to all...including, Ugggghhh...You.



[edit on 7-6-2010 by EvolvedMinistry]



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
 


Relevant info that my opinions are based on has already been posted in this thread by other folks (including YOUR links - way to go in supporting my opinions, slick!), and referenced by myself. I see no need to waste space by posting them over and over again. If you couldn't have been bothered to follow up on them to begin with, you wouldn't follow up now, either, and that ain't my problem.

Just the video alone is all over the internet. If you haven't seen it already, I'm not sure how you can consider your opinion to be an informed one.

Not only am I not going to repost the links and information, I'm also not going to respond to any more of your emotional rants. Done is done, and I'm done with your hurt 'feelings'. Not sure what you don't understand about that.

Have a nice life, y'hear?



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 03:19 PM
link   
Never in the history of the world has a commando decended from a helicopter on a rope thinking he would not encounter a fight. Maybe in training. How can such a statement me made by an armed soldier. They were lowereing him down on the ship to sing some songs and play some games? All that training must be going down the drain.



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
 


Relevant info that my opinions are based on has already been posted in this thread by other folks (including YOUR links - way to go in supporting my opinions, slick!), and referenced by myself. I see no need to waste space by posting them over and over again. If you couldn't have been bothered to follow up on them to begin with, you wouldn't follow up now, either, and that ain't my problem.

Just the video alone is all over the internet. If you haven't seen it already, I'm not sure how you can consider your opinion to be an informed one.

Not only am I not going to repost the links and information, I'm also not going to respond to any more of your emotional rants. Done is done, and I'm done with your hurt 'feelings'. Not sure what you don't understand about that.

Have a nice life, y'hear?


As expected. No sources, no proof, no argument...No case.

Its a good thing we're not in a court of law with you as a defender or a prosecutor. You would have already lost and been fired by your client, be it the state or the individual who made the unfortunate mistake of hiring you.

I think I've learned all I needed from our "EXCHANGE." Which, of course, wasn't much. But, I got to know the inner-workings of the superficiality of your argument...if that's what you would call it.

I wish that I could say that its been educational (maybe on your end), but as it were, I don't have anymore time for someone who has no proof, argument, links or case. Otherwise, its just arguing for the sake of ego. If I give anymore time to this, it would only lower my standing and IQ. There are more relevant topics with people who can back their statements with research and facts.

Enjoy being king of the ants.

Thanks for allowing me to school ya.

Out...



[edit on 7-6-2010 by EvolvedMinistry]



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
 


You Sir, are way out of line! I have tangled with you over similar issues, and all you manage to do is vomit your vitriolic trash all over everyone.

Just where are you from anyway? You are the mouthpiece for Al Jazeera rhetoric throughout this community. While you accuse Israel and the West of owning the media, Guess what? Al Jazeera owns you!!

You have posted how peaceful Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is and how this crazed loon is your hero.

You've also sympathized with Hugo Chav`ez. So what does that tell us about you, based on past posts'? You love Brutal dictators? Should we assume you would like to see Israel wiped off the map? Or perhaps the big Satan, the US gone as well?

It is quite clear how you feel about Israel, But when you make comments such as "Oh you will see! You are in for Big Surprise!" It borderlines on a threat!!

Can you not act mature enough to stick to the message rather than kill the messenger. Are you that starved for attention?

Israel had no other choice period!!

Please tell me how slingshots constitute humanitarian aide? I'm a nurse and pretty well educated, and the last time I checked a slingshot is not a dressing for a wound, nor can you administer medication through it!

Since you have all the facts, I will await your answer with great anticipation.

In the meantime Evolved, just what ministry are you teaching?

Sincerely,
Paxnatus



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry
 



Somewhat less emotionality. It's a start. Maybe you CAN learn, after all! Isn't personal growth a wondrous thing?



As expected. No sources, no proof, no argument...No case.

Its a good thing we're not in a court of law with you as a defender or a prosecutor. You would have already lost and been fired by your client, be it the state or the individual who made the unfortunate mistake of hiring you.


Here's some more education for you - in a court of law, once an exhibit is entered into the record, it doesn't have to be re-entered over and over, just because the opposition attorneys stick their fingers in their ears and chant "la la la la I can't HEAR you!"

Evidently your 'knowledge' of courtroom procedure is informed by the same lack of experience as your opinions on the matter at hand. No matter. Ignorance can be cured with education.



Thanks for allowing me to school ya.


Yeah.
Likewise. Have a nice life. I do entertain a degree of hope for you.



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


O.K. this quote:


just because the opposition attorneys stick their fingers in their ears and chant "la la la la I can't HEAR you!"

made me fall off my chair!!
I can see Evolved doing just this!!

I commend you for maintaining your cool throughout your dealings with E.M.
As you can see by my above post, he really got under my skin.

With such an intelligent group here, the inability to share a differing opinion, and agree to disagree ,gracefully, astounds me. It is people that post tripe, like Evolved Ministry, who drag the entirety of ATS, through the gutter.

Personal attacks on the OP of any post, shows immaturity, and unintelligible
capability!

Back on topic, I personally feel like the truth when it all comes out will need no defense! It will stand alone.

A little common sense and perception would tell anyone Israel defended itself accordingly and yes, it was legal.

To a job well done nenothtu,

Cheers!!
Pax



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 08:15 AM
link   
reply to post by paxnatus
 


Stars are a flying.... Sorry I missed this exchange. I love your Zest.

Now, all the comotion has died down and the facts are more eveident, it is more clear now that Israel did not break the law and were in their rights to board that ship.

It was the people of the ship that escalated the issue(s) and then acted violently towards the Israel troops-who then defended themselves-very nicely I might add.






top topics



 
79
<< 15  16  17    19  20 >>

log in

join