Jim Carroll - 22 Sep 16 - 03:30 AM

1: "Still nothing but opinions - no evidence whatever to back up your claims."

Well Jom, anybody's "estimate" of anything is "nothing but an opinion" - to declare it as a fact that 3,500 people were killed you must have 3,500 bodies, so your sources have expressed their opinion and they have absolutely nothing whatsoever to back up their claims - if you doubt that then read in detail what has been stated in the links that you yourself have provided - I have merely pointed out the inconsistencies in the stories told.

2: "The exaggeration of Jenin was exposed immediately - the facts of Sabra/Shatila have been a established for decades."

No it was not, it took about 5 to 6 months for the lies about Jenin to be exposed for what they were. Compare the stories and "eye-witness" testimony about Sabra-Shatila and Jenin and there are clear similarities, they got away with the lies in the former because the ground was not in Israel, in Jenin the ground was and remained under Israeli control.

3: "Nobody has mounted a serious challenge to the events during that time other than the Israelis in the form of their own enquiry."

The ICRC and the Lebanese Authorities in Beirut established clearly {Surveys undertaken by 17 different organisations and agencies did not put the death toll at anything like the 3,500 you claim}. The Israeli Inquiry into the events at Sabra-Shatila were harder on what was perceived as being the Israeli role in what happened than any other Inquiry carried out at the time. But all detailed that at no time did any members of the IDF enter the camp - so who was driving all those bulldozers Jom? Your eye-witnesses are very shaky about that.

4: "Even the role the Americans played in covering up this massacre has been long established, by American Human Rights Groups - it's all been put up."

Simply more opinion Jom. It was the Lebanese who drew a line under any investigation in the interests of reconciliation - no American cover-up, no Israeli cover-up.

5: "It is a matter of documented history, not opinion, certainly not yours."

That's a bit of a joke Jom, you have consistently proved beyond all possible doubt that you have absolutely no idea what documented historical fact is.

6: "You seem to be so egotistic (or simply too lazy or inept) to even bother putting up real evidence; you rely entirely on strutting bullying (rather like the somewhat inadequate Wizard of Oz who hid behind a screen with a large megaphone)."

What evidence Jom, you certainly do not have any, neither do those you link to and quote. Rather weird that what you refer to as "bullying" is in fact nothing more than your attention being drawn to the glaring inconsistencies and flaws in your arguments that you simply cannot address, which is why if either myself, Keith A or bobad put up detail you cannot counter or challenge it - If we were just making things up it would be easily refuted.

7: "The New Sports stadium is yet a nother smokescreen - it has been cited as a probable site for the bodies, nothing more."

Not exactly true that is it Jom - IIRC it was YOU who stated as though it was an established fact that the numbers required to make up your mythical 3,500 body count had been buried under a sports stadium by the Israelis in "secret". I merely asked you to name the stadium and explain how on earth it could have possibly been done under the glare of media interest prevalent on the scene at the time. Your response to this was as usual, deflection, bluster and personal attack.

8: "It seems to be the only straw you have to grasp now that your bulldozers have driven off into the sunset."

Not at all Jom, and besides IIRC they were YOUR bulldozers, I merely pointed out to you that you cannot excavate a mass grave in secret in a populated urban area with that type of machine. You have yet to explain how it could be done.

9: "If you have any evidence that this massacre didn't happen"

I have never made any claim that the massacre never happened. I have said that there is no proof that 3,500 people were killed, as you have always bandied this figure about as though it were a fact - it is not, it is an estimate that differs wildly from all others conducted and verified at the time.

10: "that the Israeli role wasn't as it has been described"

You have always stated that the IDF was directly responsible - it wasn't and both Inquiries, one International and one Israeli, make that clear, the closest they come to it is a statement to the effect that the IDF must shoulder some responsibility for probably being indirectly responsible for what occurred.

11: "that Israeli didn't appoint the individual their own enquiry cited as being responsible, Prime Minister of Israel, and by doing so, giving their blessing for the massacre of 3,500 unarmed refugees, then present it."

As Minister of Defence at the time I believe that they sacked him or forced his resignation. Him then winning a subsequent democratic election and becoming Prime Minister is not connected in any way to the events that happened in 1982 in Beirut. You and your "sources" have still to prove for definite that 3,500 refugees were indeed massacred. Going on to become a head of government, or indeed a head of state after previously misdeeds is not uncommon, after all Jom one ony has to look at Eamon de Valera - directly responsible for the deaths of ~6,000 Irish Citizens and inflicting needless damage on the economy of his country they elected him to both offices without any sort qualms of conscience.