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.

 

Hamas' Powerful New Weapon Alters Strategic Calculations Along the Gaza Strip

page: 16
12
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen
damn !!!!!

just got called to work

can't respond until later.

I still say False-Flag all the way !!!



I look forward to seeing the evidence and sources that corroborate the false flag theory.




posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 01:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


By the way what Police Department do you work for, and what Court is it that they have people prosecuted in where URL'S and Internet Links become proof of anything?

You don't have a snowballs chance in hades of getting anywhere near the evidence that proves anything in this case.

Why you would pretend it exists in the form of URL is just mind boggling.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 02:34 AM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


So your answer then would be no, you cannot provide any links / citations / sources that would support your, and a few other peoples, argument that Hamas had nothing to do with this then.

As far as evidence and court this incident, and the evidence of it, would easily be admissible in court since Hamas took credit for it, admitted it was a guided missile, admitted the bus was intentionally targeted, and claims the school bus was a valid military target.

Your simplistic view about URL's being admitted in court is mindboggeling, since they are admissible in court. The issue however is the URL's document the confession by the Hamas Spokesperson.

Burden of proof becomes easy when their is a confession involved, as in this case.
edit on 14-4-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 02:40 AM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Hey Proto, I'm in a good mood today, and feel like making someone happy:

Yes, this is without a doubt a false flag by Hamas who are Mossad agents.
We know that for certain because the Jews and the Zionists have a long tradition
of conspiracy and fAlsE fLaG opperations, starting with Jesus, UsS lIBerTY, LavoN Afair, JFK, MLK, the Beatles haircut, nIne eLeven and of course, lest we forget their grand conspiracy to exterminate 2/3 of their own people because of that sacred 6 number in their murderous tradition.
The yellow buss with a stuffed teddy bear, with a damage that resembles what a raged 12 year old with a hammer could do is no different.

Awaiting your (another) long long response.

Peacxe.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 03:15 AM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


What i said was not off topic when on your last topic you attacted everyone the chose that think against you.
You told all of us that didnt agree that you would attack us on any thread that went against your thoughts.
So im right on your topic, and i struck first, so get over it mate.

So like i said, lucky 2 billion people aint sending you its good thoughts as you would sent them to Israel.

Ps If i spelt wrong its because the aid to Israel stole me edumacation.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 03:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by gravitational
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Hey Proto, I'm in a good mood today, and feel like making someone happy:

Yes, this is without a doubt a false flag by Hamas who are Mossad agents.
We know that for certain because the Jews and the Zionists have a long tradition
of conspiracy and fAlsE fLaG opperations, starting with Jesus, UsS lIBerTY, LavoN Afair, JFK, MLK, the Beatles haircut, nIne eLeven and of course, lest we forget their grand conspiracy to exterminate 2/3 of their own people because of that sacred 6 number in their murderous tradition.
The yellow buss with a stuffed teddy bear, with a damage that resembles what a raged 12 year old with a hammer could do is no different.
.


BS, Mossad wouldn't know what a hairstyle was..
Short back and sides for them boys...



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 03:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by wakeUpOrDie
It adds up if this weapon is designed to explode on impact against a HARD target with armor, not a soft one. It did not detonate because the crappy russian chip controlling it isn't smart enough to realize it just hit its intended target. It probably has a pressure sensor depending on the type of missile that looks for a certain amount of force to be applied to the warhead before it detonates. But since it never hit anything hard enough it went through the flimsy metal of the school bus still seeking its hard target and didn't detonate. It just put a hole in the bus. I've seen this happen in Iraq before in person. I hope that clears up the confusion.



I have no knowledge of how this type of weaponry works at all so if I may ask.

If indeed it was an anti tank missile and if as you suggest it impacted the bus without detonating what would have caused the damage to the bus interior?



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 03:39 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnGeeTee
 


If indeed it was an anti tank missile and if as you suggest it impacted the bus without detonating what would have caused the damage to the bus interior?


Or blown out it's windows..



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by JohnGeeTee

Originally posted by wakeUpOrDie


I have no knowledge of how this type of weaponry works at all so if I may ask.

If indeed it was an anti tank missile and if as you suggest it impacted the bus without detonating what would have caused the damage to the bus interior?


You will get shot down if you ask too many questions about that particular rocket so Shhhhhhhh!

I wonder from which side the rocket entered the bus and than came out without blowing up just leaving a few windows shattered? It seems it didn't particularly like the luaggage compartment of the bus so blew a hole in it or is that the engine?

And if the primary explosive did detonate, wouldn't that have caused the secondary to go off too?



This picture is not the rocket that hit the bus but has simillar structure, so the sensor didn't work, primary explosive went off making a hole in the bus and living a few windows shattered. Doesn't make sense at all if you ask me.

IDF is normally quick to take pics of the the blown up remnants of Hamas's rockets, has anyone seen any pics of the blazing rocket itself?
edit on 14-4-2011 by forklift because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-4-2011 by forklift because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 04:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by forklift

You will get shot down if you ask too many questions about that particular rocket so Shhhhhhhh!


Merely a question that hopefully someone who might be familiar with this piece of kit could clear up for me.


Originally posted by forklift
I wonder from which side the rocket entered the bus and than came out without blowing up just leaving a few windows? It seems it didn't particularly like the luaggage compartment of the bus so blew a hole in it or is that the engine?

And if the primary explosive did detonate, wouldn't that have caused the secondary to go off too?

ask me.

IDF is normally quick to take pics of the the blown up remnants of Hamas's rockets, has anyone seen any pics of the blazing rocket itself?


Now that's naughty. That could be seen as suggesting that there may not have been one at all. Tut tut. Governments don't li..........mess with the truth.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 04:19 AM
link   
reply to post by forklift
 



It seems it didn't particularly like the luaggage compartment of the bus so blew a hole in it or is that the engine?


That's the engine...
Ya know, that big solid chunk of metal thingy.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 04:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by JohnGeeTee
 


If indeed it was an anti tank missile and if as you suggest it impacted the bus without detonating what would have caused the damage to the bus interior?


Or blown out it's windows..


Answer.
Israeli propaganda can create all types of damage



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 04:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by forklift
 



It seems it didn't particularly like the luaggage compartment of the bus so blew a hole in it or is that the engine?


That's the engine...
Ya know, that big solid chunk of metal thingy.

Is that the big metal thingy that would have made an armour peircing missile explode and destroy the bus to tiny little fragments of metal



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 04:41 AM
link   
reply to post by munkey66
 


LOL!

Looks like the anti-tank rocket set off the fireworks in the tank after the hit.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 04:43 AM
link   
reply to post by munkey66
 


What you see after the first impact are the secondary explosions of the ammunition inside the tank.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 06:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Originally posted by felonius
reply to post by Smurfwicked
 


This is the crap that is coming over in the stupid "peace movement" boats.

To all the idiots that supported these boats: Hope you all get a nasty case of keester itch!


You mean the International Aide Flotilla intercepted at sea by the IDF, pirated by the IDF, where the cargo of the boats was off loaded by the IDF, inspected and cataloged and warehoused by the IDF, and refused entry into Gaza by Hamas?

Those boats?

There hasn't been one aide boat of civilian international origin to make it to Gaza without being either pirated by the IDF, or disabled and turned around.

If Hamas has these rockets, and the evidence points to the attack on the school bus not being one of these rockets, based on the actual damage to the bus versus the munition's yield, they sure didn't make it into Gaza on any international aide ship.


edit on 13/4/11 by ProtoplasmicTraveler because: (no reason given)


HOLY CRAP PROTO!

WE DISAGREE FOR ONCE!


Anything coming into Israel from an unfriendly zone isnt going to be good.

When you have Bill Ayers and Co. working with these folks, it isnt going to be good.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by wonderboy2402
 


are you speaking of the october war? or was that just a different war?



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 07:36 AM
link   
"Religion is NOT the problem..
It's the way it is used by some as an excuse and others as a control..
If religion wasn't there these people would find another excuse IMO.. "

Another excuse ,such as being thrown off your own land by an ill advised(primarily British) political solution to Israeli cries for a "homeland"?, how many would do exactly the same if they were in the Palestinians position?
edit on 14-4-2011 by nake13 because: duplication



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 07:45 AM
link   
reply to post by munkey66
 


If you feel the need to, by all means.



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 08:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 





As far as evidence and court this incident, and the evidence of it, would easily be admissible in court since Hamas took credit for it, admitted it was a guided missile, admitted the bus was intentionally targeted, and claims the school bus was a valid military target.


Actually no, it wouldn't be, because it is third party hear say and inuendo. For it to be considered as more you would need the name of the Hamas spokesperson which you don't have, who would be willing and able to provide the names of the people alleged to be in Hamas that carried out the attack, who would either have to confess in court, or forensic evidence linking them to the crime and witnesses that could convince a jury that they did.

It would be the same if you used the New York Times or Al Jeezera Articles etc. The unamed Hamas spokesperson can't be served and compelled to testify without being identified, the statement he is making can't be proved as being made by him until that happens, and that would only prove he made the statement. He would actually have to assist the court through his testimony to name the actual members of the three man team required to operate and fire such a rocket. Who then would have to be apprehended and given the chance to answer the charges and to confront any witnesses against them, which would include the yet to be named Hamas Spokesman.

Otherwise it's third party hear say and innuendo that is not admissible.

Frankly it troubles me that a code enforcement henchman would so misrepresent the law in what is probably a typical daily occurence of attempting to abuse the color of their authority.

For your information the correct answer to my last question to you, the only time URL's and Websites are admissible in a court of law is for proof of Internet Crimes and or Internet Related Crimes, so unless the unnamed alleged members of Hamas delivered said missile to the schoolbus by way of the Internet and 'cybered' the bus into exploding, you got nothing.

Case dismissed and please don't jam up Proto's dockett with this nonesense in the future.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join