BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 07:08 PM

Lox, this thread is not about me, nor who agrees with me or disagrees with me. I have way earlier in this thread written of Israel bashing and anti-Semitism (not that I used that term earlier today--you did). I stand by what I wrote then, and need not repeat it. I don't accuse any particular member at Mudcat, but used 'Israel-hater' hoping some here might become a little bit more self-aware. 'Nuff said.

Now to your response to the link:
1-The Israelis let Unifil know they were going to trim the tree. Which trimming they had done times before.
2-Unifil told the Lebanese the Israelis were going to practice this horticultual activity.
3-The maps, which you ignored in your post, show that the Israelis were operating from Israeli territory.
4-The first shots came from the Lebanese--this is even acknowledged by a couple of posters, here, who, shall we say, are not exactly friends of Israel.

Unless I read or see anything that is substantially different, this will be my last post on the episode.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Lox
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 03:47 PM

The question is how you are spinning it John,

The UNIFIL observer has given no testimony at all in the article you provded that supports either side in the argument.

His comments include:

""IDF informed UNIFIL that they are going to do some work cutting the tree from the other side north of the technical fence but south of the blue line. The situation on the ground quickly became tense because the LAF also deployed their forces on the ground. We also had our own people who were trying to diffuse this tension.""


ok - nothing there ...

"Tomorrow we will have a technical team to exactly establish the location in relation to the blue line.""

ok - so they plan to investogate ... no testimony yet ...


"Our investigation has been launched today…""


mmm hmmm - still nothing ...

"Daily basis we are dealing with all the different situations. Sometimes there are incidents and we manage to resolve the potential danger."


right ... so ... John? ... what was your point exactly? .....


Spin what?


And who are the Israeli haters?


Let me guess - people who disagree with you ... they are either Israeli haters, anti semites, or self hating Jews aren't they John.


God bless all those Israelis who disagree with John.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 03:35 PM

Foolestroup thinks that such agressive pruning requires a use of lethal force against it.
Right Foolestroupe?

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 02:24 PM

Re: The Tree Incident

Go here to read comments of the UNIFIL spokesman regarding this incident. Additionally it show maps and pictures of the scene of the shooting.

It certainly seems that the UNIFIL version of this tragedy comports with the Israeli statements.

idfspokesperson.com/.../audio-transcript-of-israel-army-radios-interview-with-unifil-spokesman-milos-struger-4-aug-2010/

Spin that all you Israel-haters!

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Lox
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 01:52 PM

Bobad,

I see you have deliberately forgotten that I have stated before, as I do now, that I oppose Hamas, both in the way they treat palestinians and the way they are attempting to deal with the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

In anothger CURRENT thread to which you have contributed I have very clearly stated that I oppose the use of rockets aganst Israel.

Your deliberate insinuation that I support Hamas or the killing of Israelis is as slimy and disgusting as the videos you post.

OTT? ... You're gettting off lightly!

BTW - the last I checked, Hamas were not occupying Israel, they were not blockading Israel, they did not have thousands of Israeli prisoners in their jails on trumped up charges such as "stealing water from a settlement", they were not holding Israelis up on their way to hospital for hours or turning them away based on arbitrary medical judgements that they have no qualification to make, thus risking innocent peoples lives and in some cases causing their deaths, they were not preventing the import of food, medical supplies and things like incubators, and they did not have troops parading aggressively around Israeli residential areas acting as bullies towards teenage boys and children, nor were they knocking down Israelis houses.

I do not support Hamas - I oppose them - but to suggest I have omitted something when talking about how Israelis aree treated by Hamas is dishonest as Hamas do not treat Israelis any way at all.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 12:27 PM

The only people being conned are those that think things like "We con the world might have an effect."

The flotillas are not conning anyone. They are meant to draw attention by delivering humanitarian aid to people who need it.

It is Israel's reactions that are making the news.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 12:00 PM

As an antidote to that awful (awful in artistic terms as well as being in apalling taste) here's a song which the liverpool Socialist Choir has added to its repertoire recently. It was written by Elain Ryan and Marie Walsh, and gives some splendid advice about how you can help the victims of Israel.

I don't know what tune they set it to, but it goes very well to the tune of Bye Bye Love.

The Boycott Song

To help the people of Palestine
We don't buy grapefruit or Israeli wine
And if you're wondering what you can do:
Please join the boycott and help them too!

Ch. So we say Don't buy dates
don't buy:) Don't buy Jaffa fruit
Don't buy Israeli wine
There's a boycott going on!
repeat

Their land's been taken and occupied
Their houses bulldozed and farms destroyed
The Western powers send arms with glee
While Israel acts with impunity.        

Ch

Check sweet potatoes, avocados too
if they're from Israel you-knew what to do
Just read the bar codes those little lines,
Things made in Israel start 7 2 9.        

Ch

Tell all your neighbours "Please don't be shy
Read all the labels before you buy
You have the power each time you shop
Israel's apartheid has got to stop.        

Ch

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 11:51 AM

I've been trying to stay away from this, but a news item I caught the other day left me far angrier than any sick and stupid videos such as We Con The World.

It wasn't the announcement that Israel has decided to repatriate 1,200 Israeli born children of foreign workers. After all, Britain and the USA's policies towards immigrants are often no less barbaric. Anyway, Israel's plans for its non-Israeli population have been common knowledge for quite some time now. No, what got me steaming was the reason for the deportations, given by Netanyahu; namely that foreign residents of Israel are "undermining the Jewish character of Israel".

I seem to recall a little Austrian corporal who said that non-Aryans were undermining the Aryan character of Germany, and then had them gassed in millions.

God damn the state of Israel!

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: bobad
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 11:14 AM

You're way OTT there lox.

The "humanitarian" flotilla was a con job and the world knows it.

BTW you forgot "the way Hamas treats Israelis is disgusting" in your litany of invective.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Lox
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 10:43 AM

Bobad,

That video is disgusting.

Your attitude is disgusting.

The way the state of Israel treats palestinians is disgusting.


God bless all those Israelis, Jews, Moslems and Christians, who are working to stop the soulless callous compassionless hatred of people like you from the deaths of more hundreds of innocent men women and children.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: bobad
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 10:05 AM

We Con The World

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 08:41 AM

"Lebanon admits firing first."

Yep, they 'fired warning shots' to warn IDF personnel (with tanks and earth moving machinery) who were getting too close to the border...


... just exactly the same behaviour the IDF have used for decades to warn Gaza farmers working their land too close to the border....

An eye for an eye .... shoe on the other foot .... mutter mutter ...

You see those IDF guys were wandering around as if some invisible magical sky fairy had whispered in their ears that He had given them exclusive use of that land for eternity....

oh wait... silly me .... :-O

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 08:05 AM

Sorry Lox.
That was to Foolestroupe.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 04:05 AM

Lox, I am not gullible enough to believe either side.
You accept one side's claim without question.
Lebanon admits firing first.
We can believe that I think.

Should I have refused to answer Lox about tear gas launchers because he was being "bigoted and limited" ?

I am repeating myself on WP only in reply to others who keep bringing up the same old claims.
Why remonstrate with me about that?

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 03:31 AM

"you have not read my comments about cannister launchers in context."

There's the very limited bigoted 'context' you want, and then there is the context of the whole approx 2,000 posts that others of us have taken into account...

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 03:29 AM

"you have not read my comments about cannister launchers in context."

There's the very limited bigoted 'context' you want, and then there is the context of the whole approx 2,000 posts that others of has have taken into account...

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 03:27 AM

"Israel and Lebanon both agree that Lebanese troops fired first."

Your 'absolutely objective' linked source of documentation for this sweeping statement please? The record you have already established here means that I can't just blindly take your statement as 'gospel fact'...


Of course one would expect one side to fire at armed enemy soldiers dicking around with machinery in a 'free fire zone' border fence area (the IDF have 'set the rules' by regularly shooting at anybody walking around on the opposite side of their fences - made their bed, one might say) ... only openly arrogant lunatics would walk up to a border fence in such a contentious area, and one is tempted to think that the poor guys hit were either set up by their superiors who gave the orders, or 'were stupid enough to ask for it' by standing around in the open in the circumstances (I'm reminded of WWI trench stories of stupid young British Officers who insisted on 'just taking a quick peek over the top' and getting taken out by snipers) ... and it seems to me that the IDF were 'testing the waters' by even approaching the fence line - what with all that high powered IDF hardware able to fire back so rapidly... the fact that an IDF tank was taken out proves that they were definitely there... and any tank is always seen as a 'threat' by opposing military forces.

I saw the footage of an IDF manned backhoe with its bucket over the fence line, poking at a tree growing on the fence line...

I have heard that 'it was a Lebanese ambush' - right, they planted that tree 20 years ago and have been staking it out ever since... hahahahaha! oh boy! talk about 'gullible' ...


Just how much hassle is gone thru in Korea when either side wants to play around 'trimming trees' in THEIR 'free fire' "No Man's Land"?


"Re the WP smoke deployment."

Ah the broken record replays.... nothing new said - again ...

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 03:23 AM

Foolestroupe, you have not read my comments about cannister launchers in context.
You clearly did not read Lox's posts I was replying to.
We were discussing hand held teargas cannister launchers.

I must be one of the most conscientious readers of other's posts on this thread!

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 02:45 AM

1800...and no comment!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Aug 10 - 02:44 AM

Foolestroupe, I was afraid no one would fall for the gullible joke.
Not only did you oblige, but you then compounded it by accepting without question the Lebanese version of the recent clash.

Israel and Lebanon both agree that Lebanese troops fired first.
Lebanon said they fired because Israelis crossed the border.

The UN peacekeepers were very quickly on the scene.
The border is fenced.
They say there was absolutely no evidence of an Israeli incursion across the border.

Re the WP smoke deployment.
The munitions are vey dangerous and can and did cause some casualties, but they are not designed to cause casualties, are legal and most armed forces use them.
No evidence has been produced that civillians were targeted.
The smoke was deployed to screen troops from their enemies.
I think they should have accepted the risk to their troops rather than put civilians at risk, but I do not have a son in the IDF.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 09:18 PM

"But then, I hear NO complaints about the illegal bombardment of ISRAELI civilians from many here..."

You sir are an out right liar if you are speaking about me ...

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 09:16 PM

Israel-Lebanon border clash kills five people

The Lebanese army says Israeli soldiers crossed the border to uproot a tree which was blocking their view near the Lebanese village of Adaysseh.

A Lebanese army spokesman said troops had fired warning shots and Israel had responded with fire from artillery positions and helicopters.

The Lebanese army confirmed to the BBC that three of its soldiers had been killed and four wounded. The al-Akhbar newspaper confirmed that one of its journalists, Assaf Abu Rahhal, had also been killed.

Hezbollah fighters, who battled Israel four years ago, took no part in the exchange of fire. But Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said the group would not stand silent if Israel attacked the Lebanese army in the future.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

IDF WP bursts clearly visible on news footage - if 'only for cover' - why are they targeting Lebanese positions?

~~~~~~~~~~
"Lebanon's Higher Council for Defense headed by President Michel Suleiman said it held Israel accountable for Tuesday's clash and it would complain to the U.N. Security Council.

Israeli complained to the U.N Security Council over the clash, saying it held the government of Lebanon responsible. "

But - he hit me back first!

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Lox
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 07:56 PM

That is some of the most mealy mouthed twisting of views and creation of straw men that I have ever witnessed.

That was not your implication.

Your implcation was unambiguous that if critics of Israel truly care about dead arabs then they would be discussing the rockets too.

Your implication was clearly that critics of Israel are therefore not motivated by care for dead arabs.

Your insinuation was that therefore critics of Israel must be driven by another hidden motivation.


Now you state that critics of Israel are motivated only by bigotry against Jews.

Well Bruce let me spell it out again.


WE ALL CONDEMN THE ROCKETS.

HENCE NO DISCUSSION.



YOU DEFEND CRIMES AGAINST PALESTINIANS

HENCE THERE IS A DISCUSSION.



WE ALL RECOGNIZE THAT ISRAELIS DO NOT DESERVE TO BE FIRED UPON.

YOU DO NOT RECOGNIZE THAT PALESTINIANS DO NOT DESERVE TO BE FIRED UPON.


YOU DEFEND ISRAELS RIGHT TO KILL PALESTINIANS.


AND IF SOMEONE DISAGREES YOU SAY IT IS BECAUSE THEY DISCRIMINATE AGAINST JEWS.


You've spelled it out very clearly.

Thank you for clarifying your position as a hypocrite and a wholly partisan bigot.


You are one fucked up individual.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 07:00 PM

No.

I merely point out that f it were illegal weapons that were being complained about, there would be at least SOME mention of the Palestinian ones. Since there has not been, those people must have no objection to illegal weapons: It is Jews being allowed to defend themselves that they find offensive.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Lox
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 06:49 PM

Bruce.

Noone is defending Hamas rocket attacks.

we all agree that they are BAD.


The only argument remaining is the one about Israeli attacks against Palestinians.

These are being defended on this thread.


ergo - a discussion.


so we all condemn the murders of Israelis by palestinians.

But you and others on here do not condemn the much greater number of murders of Palestinians by Israelis.


So stop whingeing and moralizing because the only ones on here who show any contempt for arab lives, and the only ones apologizing for murder, on this website are those who are defending the Israelis proportionally much greater agression.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Lox
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 06:40 PM

Ah - Bearded Bruce ...

... SO you agree that the use of WP in this context is comparable to the random terror inflicted by the men who criminally fire the rockets into Israel from Gaza.

You agree that the use of WP is criminal and terrorist and intended to maim and injure if not kill.


Lets have a discussion about the rockets.

Their use is a crime.

Anyone disagree?

No.

ok discussion over.

How about a dscussion about WP.

Its use is a crime.

Anyne disagree?

yes lots of people.

ok - discussion ongoing.


... where were we?

Ah yes - the use of WP is akin to the use of rockets against civilians ...

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 06:27 PM

Dropping a large rocket of explosives with a ball-bearing casing to maximize civilian casualties is also very inaccurate, but it's still bloody effective, even just as a terror weapon "bloody hell, if they're gonna throw those things around, I'm outta here" ... unless it IS your home....


But then, I hear NO complaints about the illegal bombardment of ISRAELI civilians from many here...


How about the dead Jordanian ( from the last batch of rockets launched from the Sinai?)? ANybody want to say how inhuman the launchers of THOSE rockets were???



Or is it ONLY when Israelis kill Arabs that you give a damn?

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 06:25 PM

"Historical footnote. The word "gullible" was accidently omitted by Dr Sam Johnson from his original dictionary, and to this day it is not found in any printed dictionary out of respect for the great man. "

More delusional ramblings hoping to brainwash us gullible dupes ... sigh... It's a regular 1 April joke mate - I have a wall full of dictionaries next to me, and more at my own home - many general English ones as well as specific area one, eg computing, nursing, (2 at random) and others...

Etymology

Either gull +‎ -ible, or from dialect Middle English gull ("newly hatched bird"), perhaps from Old Norse gulr, from the hue of its down.

    * "credulity" in Roget's Thesaurus, T. Y. Crowell Co., 1911.
    * "gullible" in Moby Thesaurus II, Grady Ward, 1996.


http://www.wordswarm.net/dictionary/gullible.html

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&as_qdr=all&q=gullible

Hey, Did You Know the Word "Gullible" isn't in the Dictionary? - entry for 1 April ...

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 06:00 PM

"It is just fanciful to believe that with a cannister launcher you can do more than point it in a general direction"

I have seen footage of those WP airbursts - have also done the pyro (fireworks) course - and thy DO look pretty - and spread the burning junk over a large area - where, as previously agreed to by all, they will melt skin off ...

Dropping a large cannister of napalm is also very inaccurate, but it's still bloody effective, even just as a terror weapon "bloody hell, if they're gonna throw those things around, I'm outta here" ... unless it IS your home....

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 05:54 PM

We are all fallible Jack.
Jim had not read any of that long piece about Fallujah.
We can help each other.
Point out one thing I have missed or failed to respond to Jack.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 03:11 PM

No, not on that topic.

You haven't bothered to read what anyone else has said. There is no point.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 01:22 PM

Jack, "the round so far specified.."
There have been no updates, and it was a long time ago.
Those were the rounds used Jack, and there is a familiar illustration of the airburst.
So you really do not have anything else to say to me Jack.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 12:06 PM

"Will the countries which mobilized the flotillas of humanitarian aid for their Muslim brothers in Gaza "
A totally illogical and destructive argument and one usually put by someone with an axe to grind.
There are thousands of causes to give your support to - the logic of your argument is that we support none of them because we can't support them all.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 10:53 AM

Keith A, I've read reports where the IDF has claimed to have fired WP rounds from 155 howitizers on "enemy positions."

I have read reports of schools, houses, aid and civilians which have been burned by airbursts of WP.

Janes is a good source of technical information, but this statement does nothing to make your case.

>>>he round so far specified as being fired are the M825A1 which is purely an air-burst white phosherous smoke projectile." the analyst said. 'It's construction and function is highly elaborate and I would say deliberately so to make it inappropriate for anti-personnel use'. M825A1 shell is not defined as an incendiary weapon by the Third Protocol to the Convention on Conventional Weapons because its principal use is to produce smoke to protect troops. <<

The phrase "so far specified" means there may have been other types of rounds used. Even so a 767 jetliner is also not defined as an incendiary weapon by the Third Protocol to the Convention on Conventional Weapons because its principal use is to fly people around. But those firemen and office workers in the twin towers are still dead.

You are a poorly informed apologist for terrorism and mass murder. I have nothing more to say to you.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Lox
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 09:01 AM

"I doubt it very much;"

so neither of you knows then ...

here is the IHH homepage detailing the humanitarian help they are currently engaged in.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: bobad
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 08:40 AM

Will the countries which mobilized the flotillas of humanitarian aid for their Muslim brothers in Gaza do the same for the beleaguered people of Pakistan who have been left homeless, hungry and battling disease due to the flooding caused by the monsoon rains?

I put this question to Tarek Fatah, activist, writer, broadcaster and founder of the Canadian Muslim Congress. This is his reply: "I doubt it very much; we are too dark-skinned to deserve a flotilla. So, in exchange, Our 'brothers' have sent us tonnes of 'prayers' and 'chants' along with the consignment of AK-47s, an arsenal of IDU components and clerics to pray for the dead.".

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 06:56 AM

I am not calling you a liar Lox, but I do think you have been mislead.
A rifle is a hundred times more accurate than a cannister launcher, but even with that soldiers are trained to aim for centre of mass, to increase chance of hitting at all.
And, standing unsupported is the least effective firing position for accuracy.
It is just fanciful to believe that with a cannister launcher you can do more than point it in a general direction.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 06:37 AM

If true, the individual soldiers are misbehaving.
If video exists, action could and should be brought against them, as has happened previously to Israeli soldiers.
Or, are you suggesting that their government ordered them to do that?

Can you link us to these videos?

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Lox
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 06:13 AM

"Lox, how close were they to the protesters?
I ask because the hand held launchers have no sights and short, unrifled barrels.
To aim at a face sized target you would have to be close enough to punch them anyway."

This is all irrelevant.

Firstly, the whole idea of a tear gas canister launcher is that you point it in a particular direction and it fires tha canister there and not anywhere else.

So thats what they did.

But thats just nit picking.

The evidence is the videos in which you hear the soldiers saying "aim at the face" and this is then supported by the numerous facial injuries that have been sustained from tear gas canisters fired with malicious intent.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 06:00 AM

More lies about me.
I was never an apologist for those who killed. I denounced them.

I described as fascist your support for using military might to force a population to change their chosen form of government.
I stand by that.
It had nothing to do with us disagreeing.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 05:31 AM

"Methinks the lady doth protest too much" - especially one who had no compunction in describing those who opposed his arguments as "Fascist" while he was being an apologist for the massacre of 14 unarmed demonstrators on Bloody Sunday.
One of us certainly doesn't belong here.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 04:01 AM

"Throughout this thread you have been maliciously obstructive in your support for Israeli brutality - you continue to be so"

It is a lie that I have supported ANYONE'S brutality.
Show one example. No chance.
How is it possible to be obstructive? How did I obstruct you Jim?
You post lies and nonsense about me.

"You have deliberately attempted to disguise the effect of phosphorus by describing it as 'smoke'"

It was a smoke producing munition. That is what it is for. That is what defines it and is how it is defined. Sorry if you can not understand that.

"and have defended its use by repeating parrot-fashion that "WP smoke is not recognised by governments as a chemical weapon" "

BECAUSE IT IS A FACT THAT YOU NEVER MANAGED TO GET YOUR HEAD AROUND!

"You have totally ignored the described effects it has had when used in civilian areas"

That is another lie. I have acknowledged all its effects.

"You have continued to dismiss its illegality by ignoring or denying that it has been used in populated areas"

Another lie. We all understood that from the start. That is what this discussion is about.

"Your arrogant attitude, as displayed to Jack in your last posting, comes with no authority,"

Jack was wrong to dismiss the tactical value of smoke here.
You do not need to be a great authority to know that.

Your final string of insults were simply beneath contempt and I will not raise them out of the gutter to refute.

If you can not engage in reasoned, honest debate you do not belong here.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 03:21 AM

Keith:
Throughout this thread you have been maliciously obstructive in your support for Israeli brutality - you continue to be so.
You have deliberately attempted to disguise the effect of phosphorus by describing it as 'smoke' and have defended its use by repeating parrot-fashion that "WP smoke is not recognised by governments as a chemical weapon"
You have totally ignored the described effects it has had when used in civilian areas, both in Gaza and Fallujah, the statements by doctors and scientists on its properties, even the definition of the material itself.
You have continued to dismiss its illegality by ignoring or denying that it has been used in populated areas.
Your arrogant attitude, as displayed to Jack in your last posting, comes with no authority, or none that you have presented, or I'm sure it would have been crowed from the rooftops long before now - such is the ego that appears to motivate you.
If your argument throughout this thread has had any purpose at all, it has been to divert from the war crimes committed by the Israelis against Palestinian civilians, and now against those who would bring relief to a besieged people.
One can only imagine the arguments you would put up in support of Sharpville, Pinochet, Guantanamo, Fallujah.... and all of history's monsters and their adventures.
If you are owed any credit, it is for your tenacity in pursuing your cause to defend these people and their outrages. Well done - you have truely earned your place in the 'Holocaust Deniers Hall of Fame'.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Aug 10 - 02:58 AM

Lox, how close were they to the protesters?
I ask because the hand held launchers have no sights and short, unrifled barrels.
To aim at a face sized target you would have to be close enough to punch them anyway.

Re the smoke.
Accrding to IHS Jane's Weapons Technology Analyst commenting on the discussions surrounding the Israeli use of white phosherous agents in Gaza, "The round so far specified as being fired are the M825A1 which is purely an air-burst white phosherous smoke projectile." the analyst said. 'It's construction and function is highly elaborate and I would say deliberately so to make it inappropriate for anti-personnel use'. M825A1 shell is not defined as an incendiary weapon by the Third Protocol to the Convention on Conventional Weapons because its principal use is to produce smoke to protect troops. White Phosphorous weapons banned by theprotocol are ground or low level burst weapons designed primarily for anti-personnel use. The primary function of the M825A1 is for the rapid creation of a highly effective, but short lived visible and infrared smoke screen.
http://defense-update.com/newscast/0109/analysis/analysis_080109_phosphorous.html

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Lox
Date: 02 Aug 10 - 07:21 PM

Bear in mind that the IDF have been caught using tear gas canisters as weapons against peaceful demonstrators on numerous occasions, by deliberately aiming at their faces, and there is a consistent pattern.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Aug 10 - 06:04 PM

Jim, a direct hit or near miss from a smoke round can cause serious or fatal injuries.
Weapons intended to inflict casualties are deadly over much greater distances.
WP smoke is not recognised by governments as a chemical weapon or even a weapon. You clearly do not agree, but how much of an authority are you?
Jack, you may be a great sailor but you know little about soldiering.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 02 Aug 10 - 05:40 PM

Keith one so "open minded" you sure talk a lot of nonsense. The WP was lobbed on people, schools hospitals, UN aid and houses in 155 mm howitzer shells from some distance away. You don't need a smoke screen in a heavily populated city. You can hide behind buildings. In fact smoke would draw attention to your position.

It was used as an offensive weapon to destroy civilian infrastructure and to punish the populace for voting for Hamas.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Aug 10 - 04:42 PM

"It was used to screen their soldiers from their enemies."
Now I am confused - those who were treated for burns were sitting too close to the fire - is that right?
And those who were maimed and burnt in Fallujah were out in the sun for too long????
And maybe the Wiki definition is wrong - and the clear descriptions by the Amesrican soldier and the scientists....
Mealy mouthed hypocritical cant. No change there then!!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Aug 10 - 04:18 PM

Read all my quotes. I have acknowledged the risk even of wp smoke, but it is not a chemical weapon. It is not a weapon at all.
You saying it does not make it true.
It was wrong to use it in a populated city but there is no evidence of targeting civilians.
It was used to screen their soldiers from their enemies.

Subject: RE: BS: New Israeli atrocity: attack on Gaza aid
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Aug 10 - 04:00 PM

"20th July White phosphorous is nasty stuff,"
WP is not nasty stuff - it is poisonous, ands it kills and burns people; your description is insulting considering the damage it does - 'praising with faint damns' in fact.
You have stated categorically that the Israelis have not targeted civilians - not true.
Your postings are becoming hysterically confused - are you now admitting that the Israeli's use of phosphorus on civilian targets constitutes a war crime - please be specific?
"Jim, YOU have constantly denied to Israel the right to defend themselves"
No I haven't - I have said that an invaders should expect efforts to repel them. The Israelis are the aggressors here as far as I am concerned, they have used chemical weapons on occupied cities, they have invaded Palestinian territory with heavy weapons, tanks, armored cars, they have bombed civilian area, bombarded hospital and schools, even relief food supplies. Complaining about random shelling is like Goliath expecting David to throw away his sling.
"Jews stopped standing in rows to be shot after WW II. "
Once again you scurry behind the holocaust to make your argument - my grouse is with the Israeli government, not the Jewish people - and it never has been.
You appear to be doing what you have accused Hamas of doing - in this case, using the Jewish people as hostages.
Jim Carroll