So why do people hate Israel? - Page 146




 
--
 
July 20th, 2013  
udaka
 
Fcuk the Israel, you and your people have blood of Palastines on your hands.
July 20th, 2013  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
Your "Zionazi inspired homework" may be alright for you, as it is a matter of public record how they lie and distort the facts to suit themselves. I'm more interested in the known facts. None of what you have said proves the boy did not die, or even creates any doubt. You can count marks on stonework, you can lie and submit your Zionist hasbara , but it has nothing whatsoever to do with the boys death, a view generally supported outside of Israel. The simple fact that the Muhammad al Durrah cannot be found, nor any evidence of him being alive after the incident 12 years ago is good evidence that he was killed in the incident.
Well, a remarkable boy. He's brought in at the Gaza's Al-Shifra Hospital at 10 AM, (as witnessed by docter Mohammed Tawil), was filmed at the location at 2 PM with his fasther. Died at 3 PM (both witnessed by cameraman Talal Abu Rahma) and then moved his arm and looked at the camera! (witnessed by cameraman Talal Abu Rahma but cut out of the movie).
But Israel has magic bullets. They fire 400 rounds (witnessed by cameraman Talal Abu Rahma), leaving eight holes in the wall and killing both the boy and wounding his father without bloodloss.

but there's more:

Furthermore, MENA also presented images filmed on September 30, 2000, by other photojournalists and cameramen, notably from Reuters, at the same location where Mohamed Al Dura’s faked death was filmed. There was, in fact, a multitude of cameramen at the scene that day, and, rather oddly, none of them filmed the above scene, or the evacuation of the father and the child.

Moreover, a director was on the scene and war scenes, acted out by amateur performers, were being filmed at the same location that same day. Furthermore, in one of the scenes caught on film, the director says, “It’s all ruined. We have to do it all over again,” while waving his arms and coordinating the actors.


And there's a lot more:

"Jamal al Dura declared on medical records in 1992 that Palestinian militia had attacked him with axes. Doctors at Gaza’s Shifa Hospital* were able to save his life but he lost the use of his right hand because they could not repair a ruptured tendon in the forearm. " but was restored by Israeli surgeons. Probably free of charge. Dr. Yehuda was one of the surgeons.

"In March 2011, Jamal sued Dr. Yehuda for libel in a French court. The lower court in France found for al-Dura, but on Wednesday, a French Appeals Court overturned the conviction and acquitted Dr. Yehuda."

Muhammad al Durrah dead or alive? : Mohamed's wedding?
Sunday, November 18, 2007
"Last night, I reported that Hamas had arrested Jamal al-Dura, the father of Muhammed al-Dura, for involvement in a 'family brawl.' This morning, the Jerusalem Post carried an al-AP report that says that al-Dura was arrested for shooting in the air during a wedding, a long-standing 'Palestinian' tradition. Here's where things get dicey:"

Muhammed al-Dura would have been 19-20 years old at that time, the marrying age in this part of the world.

Quote:
The French defamation case was definitely settled on June 26, 2013, by the French Court of Appeals: Karsenty was convicted of defamation and fined €7,000 by the Paris Court of Appeals. [6] Karsenty's version, which described the killing of young Mohammed Al Durah as "staged", was rejected by the French Court's final decision. So in view of the evidence and it's interpretation by "experts" the French court seems to support the cameraman's side of events.
You do not seem to know why the French High court ruled it that way. The court never said that the evidence and it's interpretation by "experts" seems to support the cameraman's side of events. The high court said the appeals court had overstepped its bounds in ordering France 2 to send it the rushes of the report, this is exactly the part where it was seen that the boy was still alive at the end of the film. In other words, the French Hifgh Court ruled that the parts that were cut from the film could not be used as evidence. So the evidence that the film was a fake is there but was not allowed to be used at the French High Court.

Quote:
The most telling evidence to support his death being that after the insult of Israeli lies about the matter Jamal al Durrah (his father) consented to having the body exhumed for forensic testing by an independent arbiter,... the Israelis never took up the option. Because they knew it was the boy.
The boy is claimed to be buried in al-Bureiz refugee camp. I say let's dig him up.... if they can find him.

Quote:
So now you are against democracy? (not surprising) Whatever story you make up, Hamas is still the legally elected government, bought into being by Israel's history of more than 40 years of murder and war crimes.
This has nothing to do with democracy but with rule of law. And no, Hamas is not the legally elected government. They won the election but didn't abide by the rules. Rule of Law in the PA gave Abbas the power to intervene which he did.

Quote:
Thank you, Israel could not accept anything as no one gave them anything. You know this has all been settled before, Israel is a land of Illegal European immigrants who flooded the land of Palestine after the Brits were driven out as a result of Zionist terror campaign against the legitimate administrators of Palestine. They then started an admitted campaign of ethnic cleansing that continues to this day in direct contravention of a number of International laws.
Israel accepted the partition plan, founded the state of Israel and was recognised by the UN. Case closed.
Jews and Arabs lived all over the Palestine Mandate. We now have Israel with 1,617,000 Arabs and the PA with almost no Jews. Who's etnic cleansing you said?

Quote:
Quote me a credible source stating that European Jews and their descendants have a legal "right" to occupy any part of Palestine. (or anywhere else).
Stupid question. European Jews and their descendants don't occupy anything. They emmigrated a country and immigrated into another one (it's called freedom of movement in international law). If they are allowed in, they can settle. Israel is a country recognised by the UN. The PA is not recognised yet so parts of movement are arranged between Israel and the PA. Israel presides over area C and allows its citizens to live in the settlements. Did you know that Arabs live in those settlements to?
July 21st, 2013  
senojekips
 
 
I cant work out whether you are an idiot or a pathological liar. Not one solitary thing you have posted shows that Mohammad al Durrah was not killed and until he is shown to be alive something the Israelis could do in a matter of days if it were true, your answers will be completely disregarded.

A great example of the feeble excuses fed to you by your controllers, is shown in your answer regarding the number of shots fired vs the number of holes found in the wall, no one implied that every shot was directed deliberately at the boy and his father. The statement was that he was killed in the crossfire (most probably deliberately, in view of the past record of IDF "accidental deaths"). It only takes one shot to do this. The very fact that there were bullet holes in the wall where they were sheltering is a credible indicator that someone was shooting at them at some stage.

No one has the "right" to enter a foreign country illegally. The European Jews were not refugees as they were quite safe where they were, so they were illegal immigrants, Freedom of movement only applies to persons doing so legally or as legitimate refugees, the Jews were not as they had no visas nor other paperwork. Don't believe me,... try just arriving in a foreign country without the correct paperwork, you will be returned to your point of origin within 24 hours.

Again you merely resort (unsuccessfully) to smoke and mirrors as you have with every other answer, all of which have been previously answered (several times).
--
July 21st, 2013  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScarabVenom
Which part of that is from the book and which part is from you? Second, please tell me where you got the 260 Israeli citizens number. 5th of April, 1956 Israel kills 58 civilians. On 3rd of November, the UN reports 275 civilians killed by IDF.
In 1955 alone 260 Israeli citizens were killed by Fedayeen raids (page 43)and Egypt, which got a significant amount of new Il-28 bpmbers and MiG 15 fighters started to intrude into Israeli air space.(page 43) (sentence shortened by me, the rest was about other plane types, replacements) At that time, the IAF planes were inferior to the new Egyption ones. Israel would be helpless against a new Arab attack so they took the opportunity to fight along the British and French which guaranteed Israel's safety.(my words, but the book goes into detail on what planes and how many - The IDF/AF was not well equipped for an offensive operation. page 43.) The French gave Israel air protection. (my words). The book says: The problem was solved by the French offer of fighter cover and a squadron of Noratlas transports for the duration (page 44)
Pressure to stop the fighting was more related to the French and British than the Israelis. (it was a joint French-British operation, Israel only played a minor role in it allthough they captured a lot of Egyptian material and were responsible for the failure of the ultimatum as planned by the French and British) Israel was satisfied with the destruction of the Egyptian air force by the British and French.(Egypt lost 260 aircraft on the ground) The British got a 500 million$ US loan (my words - the book says : A run on the Sterling resulted in the need for a loan from the International Monetary Fund, in effect dominated by the US intrests. The Americans agreed to support a loan of $500 million against a ceasefire.page 54) and the Soviet leader Nicolai Bulganin had threatened to destroy London and Paris with nuclear missiles. (Air Wars and Aircraft page 54) (I left out : On the 5th November)
Quote:
So, Egyptians did stuff on their territory disliking the UN forces. Yitzhak Rabin, the Israeli army chief of staff said "I do not believe that Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent into Sinai on May 14 would not have been enough to unleash an offensive against Israel. He knew it and we knew it." General Mattityahu Peled, a member of Israel's general staff, said "the thesis according to which the danger of genocide weighed on us in June 1967, and that Israel struggled for its physical existence is only a bluff born and developed after the war." The UN forces were stationed along the border between Egypt and Israel following the 1956 war. Israel refused the stationing of UN troops on its soil, while Egypt accepted them. Egyptians had the right to withdraw them at any point. Speaking of the belli of sorts, if you're going to put law as your tool here then, accept the fact that also according to the UN law, all territories seized after the 1967 war are occupied territories making Israel an aggressor.
casus belli is not a law but a Latin expression meaning the justification for acts of war.
About the occupied territories, it is more complex than that:

Article 43 of The Hague Regulations and Peace Operations

“The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.”

1 There was no legitimate power in the West Bank nor in Gaza in 1967. Jordan’s attempt to annex the West Bank in 1950 had only been recognized by Great Britain and Pakistan and this position remained unchanged until its loss to Israel in 1967. Jordan may have been an occupying power. It certainly was not a legitimate power.

2 The West Bank was not a “country” or recognized as part of a country in 1967. Its legal status then was—and still is—part of the 6% of land contained in the Mandate for Palestine still remaining unallocated pursuant to the provisions of the Mandate and the UN Charter.

3 Article 43 does not mention—nor can it be reasonably interpreted as including—any obligation to “re-establish and maintain civil life for the benefit of the occupied population”


Quote:
You have [...] up there, I would like to humbly ask what they stand for...second thing, there were 2 targets, cool, 1 was in 18 December 1969? As in 5 months before what we were talking about, I don't see where they are related. Third thing, let's say we'll agree on the military targets behind civilians thing, your source claims in many cases. Since we're speaking of 1 case which is the 8th of April incident, do you have valid proof that the school was somehow hiding a military base?
the [...] was in the link of Wikipedia. The book is where Wikipedia got it from. So I don't know what sentences or pages were left out.
From 7 januari to 13 april 1970 Israel flew 3.300 sorties dropping 8.000 lbs of ordanance on Egypt. Do you think that if Israel deliberately target civilians and schools they fly 3.299 "fake" missions to get one out? This was clearly a mistake.


Quote:
Honestly, how many buffers does Israel need? They had the entire Sinai as a buffer zone yet, they care so much about the half of the canal? The 100 meters? That gives a lot of security right there. And I have never denied the settlements being dismantled, I was basically basing an argument as they intended to stay in the Sinai. What made them leave it, I wonder?
Israel left because security was guaranteed in the peace treaty. And up until recently it worked. Did Israel attacked Egypt since the peace treaty? No! Only recently there were a few retaliatory strikes against jihadists because they take advantage of the situation where the military is more occupied with restoring law and order in Egypt. What would you do if your country is being attacked relentlessly from its founding up until today? Both by regular armies and Jihadists. When a country says it is going to wipe you of the map. With a government that has in its covenant not only the destruction of Israel but also the killing of the Jews. An international community and media that cries foul when Israel makes a mistake but is silent when a Jihadist blows himsel up in a restaurant full of innocent civilians. May I remind you that suicide missions are very carefully planned? That a female(!) Palestinian terrorist smiled upon hearing that she caused death of 8 children.
yes, Israel needs safety buffers.

Quote:
Yeah yeah, I know the story. Israel claims alot so, I stopped really caring about the claims. But the commission ruled in Egypt's favor, not just because they love Egypt, right?
Israel accepted the commission's verdict didn't they? Israel claims are mostly well-founded. What have the Islamic Arabs achieved by attacking the Jews for almost 100 years? They didn't stop an Israeli state, they refused their part of the partition plan, their economy, education and technology is behind that of Israel and now they are fighting each other in an Arab Spring or civil war. The difference is that Israel solves its problems and the Arab states blames it problems on someone else, starting with Israel and the US. Iran even blamed bad weather on the West!

Quote:
Originally Posted by udaka
Fcuk the Israel, you and your people have blood of Palastines on your hands.
If the Palestinians wouldn't have attacked Israel and the Jews there wouldn't be any blood.
July 21st, 2013  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
I cant work out whether you are an idiot or a pathological liar. Not one solitary thing you have posted shows that Mohammad al Durrah was not killed and until he is shown to be alive something the Israelis could do in a matter of days if it were true, your answers will be completely disregarded.
You're just talking nonsens. Every one knows that a dead person cannot lift its arms and look at the camera.

Israel cannot show that in a matter of days because it has no jurisdiction in Gaza, and you know that and Hamas knows that.

Quote:
A great example of the feeble excuses fed to you by your controllers, is shown in your answer regarding the number of shots fired vs the number of holes found in the wall, no one implied that every shot was directed deliberately at the boy and his father. The statement was that he was killed in the crossfire (most probably deliberately, in view of the past record of IDF "accidental deaths"). It only takes one shot to do this. The very fact that there were bullet holes in the wall where they were sheltering is a credible indicator that someone was shooting at them at some stage.
There were no shots fired deliberately at the boy and his father because it was faked. It was not the only scene that was faked. If you get shot you bleed. No blood is to be seen.

Quote:
No one has the "right" to enter a foreign country illegally. The European Jews were not refugees as they were quite safe where they were, so they were illegal immigrants, Freedom of movement only applies to persons doing so legally or as legitimate refugees, the Jews were not as they had no visas nor other paperwork. Don't believe me,... try just arriving in a foreign country without the correct paperwork, you will be returned to your point of origin within 24 hours.
I don't believe you. Ask the hikers who strayed into Iran, they were put in jail. The European Union is full of people who illegally entered. Once they are on European ground they cannot be forced to go back without investigating that they can stay. That investigation can take months. In Belgium they were even staying in hotels because there were not enough places for illegal immigrants.

From the latter half of the 19th century and early 20th century some 25.000 jews immigrated into the Ottoman empire, together with ....over 1 million muslims who came from the Balkans and Russia. That is exclusive the muslims who came from Arab countries.

The palestine mandate gave the Jews a homeland. Other mandates gave the Arabs lebanon, Syria , Iraq and later Trans-Jordan. The Palestine Mandate gave politcal rights only to the Jews. Then came the partition plan accepted by the Jews and refused by the Arabs. The partition plan (a recommendation) died but the mandate survived (article 80 of the UN charter and ICJ advisory opinion). Since the mandate survived the West Bank and Gaza belongs to the Jews.

Quote:
Again you merely resort (unsuccessfully) to smoke and mirrors as you have with every other answer, all of which have been previously answered (several times).
It is time for you to distinguish facts from smoke and mirrors.

en zet die ploat af!
July 21st, 2013  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
You're just talking nonsens. Every one knows that a dead person cannot lift its arms and look at the camera.

"You're just talking nonsens." (sic.)...... and everyone knows that you've already been told several times, that there was NEVER any claim that he was dead at that time.


(1). Israel is still unable to produce Mohammad al Durrah.
(2). Israel never took up the offer of his father to have the body exhumed and independently forensically tested, because they KNEW he was killed by their troops.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
The palestine mandate gave the Jews a homeland.
Already shown to be false many times, Palestine was SUGGESTED as the site for a Jewish homeland as were Canada, Kenya and even Tasmania. This suggestion was never ratified as it contravened the obligation of the league of Nations to oversee the administration of the land in the interests of it's people until they could take over.

You are as usual just making up your story as you go along.

Bye, bye idiot.

July 22nd, 2013  
ScarabVenom
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
In 1955 alone 260 Israeli citizens were killed by Fedayeen raids (page 43)
Got proof that those Fedayeens were Egyptians? Yeah, maybe they were in Gaza, but they're still Palestinians.
Quote:
and Egypt, which got a significant amount of new Il-28 bpmbers and MiG 15 fighters started to intrude into Israeli air space.(page 43)
Well, we intruded their airspace, big crime. They steal our Sinai; self-defense.
Quote:
At that time, the IAF planes were inferior to the new Egyption ones. Israel would be helpless against a new Arab attack so they took the opportunity to fight along the British and French which guaranteed Israel's safety.(my words, but the book goes into detail on what planes and how many - The IDF/AF was not well equipped for an offensive operation)
The IAF wasn't equipped for an offensive, sure, but I assume they were equipped for defense right? So supposedly, they could defend themselves when they're attacked.
Quote:
The French gave Israel air protection.The book says: The problem was solved by the French offer of fighter cover and a squadron of Noratlas transports for the duration
Pressure to stop the fighting was more related to the French and British than the Israelis. (it was a joint French-British operation, Israel only played a minor role in it allthough
I agree with that, but still, even a minor role, they were a part of it. I can't care less about who did the damage. Whoever was a part of it, is to be blamed.
Quote:
they captured a lot of Egyptian material and were responsible for the failure of the ultimatum as planned by the French and British) Israel was satisfied with the destruction of the Egyptian air force by the British and French.(Egypt lost 260 aircraft on the ground) The British got a 500 million$ US loan (my words - the book says : A run on the Sterling resulted in the need for a loan from the International Monetary Fund, in effect dominated by the US intrests. The Americans agreed to support a loan of $500 million against a ceasefire.page 54) and the Soviet leader Nicolai Bulganin had threatened to destroy London and Paris with nuclear missiles. (Air Wars and Aircraft page 54) (I left out : On the 5th November)
Yeah, sure, the political situation was favorable to Egypt because Egypt wasn't the aggressor at the end.
Quote:
casus belli is not a law but a Latin expression meaning the justification for acts of war.
About the occupied territories, it is more complex than that:

Article 43 of The Hague Regulations and Peace Operations

“The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.”

1 There was no legitimate power in the West Bank nor in Gaza in 1967. Jordan’s attempt to annex the West Bank in 1950 had only been recognized by Great Britain and Pakistan and this position remained unchanged until its loss to Israel in 1967. Jordan may have been an occupying power. It certainly was not a legitimate power.

2 The West Bank was not a “country” or recognized as part of a country in 1967. Its legal status then was—and still is—part of the 6% of land contained in the Mandate for Palestine still remaining unallocated pursuant to the provisions of the Mandate and the UN Charter.

3 Article 43 does not mention—nor can it be reasonably interpreted as including—any obligation to “re-establish and maintain civil life for the benefit of the occupied population”
You got some interesting stuff up there but, that's for Palestine which is not really my area so, you got the other members to discuss this with. I was talking about the Sinai who had a legitimate power over it and recognized as part of a country. So your arguments are invalid for the Sinai.

Quote:
the [...] was in the link of Wikipedia. The book is where Wikipedia got it from. So I don't know what sentences or pages were left out.
Copying from Wikipedia now? Since Wikipedia tends to be biased towards Israel now, I'm more curious about the [...] and your source isn't complete so, it can't be accepted.
Quote:
From 7 januari to 13 april 1970 Israel flew 3.300 sorties dropping 8.000 lbs of ordanance on Egypt. Do you think that if Israel deliberately target civilians and schools they fly 3.299 "fake" missions to get one out? This was clearly a mistake.
We have talked about this before and I do know that they claim it being a mistake. What you said before was basically the school hiding a military target behind it and that wasn't the case so, now you're on track claiming that it's a mistake. I will tell you this regarding that, mistakes can be understandable but doesn't have to be acceptable. Israel is still responsible and whatever intelligence provided them with this false information is also held accountable. Was any of those responsible taken to justice?
Quote:
Israel left because security was guaranteed in the peace treaty. And up until recently it worked. Did Israel attack Egypt since the peace treaty?
Not because they were defeated in the war before then, huh? Did Israel kill Egyptians on Egyptian territory after the peace treaty? Yes,
Since I had this character limit coming up, I can't copy what I said in the other thread and excuse me for cutting from your quotes.

Egypt's situation with Israel in the present and the past


Quote:
What would you do if your country is being attacked relentlessly from its founding up until today?
If statements usually aren't a part of reality so, that doesn't apply here. But, if my country occupies other nation's territories and claim to have an invincible army then gets attacked constantly, I'd blame my government.
Quote:
Both by regular armies and Jihadists. When a country says it is going to wipe you of the map. With a government that has in its covenant not only the destruction of Israel but also the killing of the Jews.
I don't recall any wars Egypt started to kill all Jews neither the annihilation of Israel. Maybe the 1948 war, but that's a whole different story and the reasons why Egypt attacked them were discussed with you before.
Quote:
An international community and media that cries foul when Israel makes a mistake but is silent when a Jihadist blows himsel up in a restaurant full of innocent civilians.
I thought it's the other way around? I thought anybody who opposes Israel is an anti-semitic while anybody who opposes jihadists is a patriot.
Quote:
May I remind you that suicide missions are very carefully planned? That a female(!) Palestinian terrorist smiled upon hearing that she caused death of 8 children.
Well, sorry to hear that and I don't like anyone who enjoys the death of others regarding who the "others" are. Yet, you're sympathizing using Palestinian actions which is not our topic of discussion, I'd be more interested when you say that to the other members who are more into the Palestine/Israel topic.
Quote:
yes, Israel needs safety buffers.
So although they had the entire Sinai as a "buffer" half of the Suez canal which is only a 100 meters is that important?? If Egypt bordered an Ocean and they wanted half of that as a buffer zone I would be more understanding. Israel just made an attempt to have a hold of the Suez canal, accept it or not. Nazi Germany wanted the Suez canal, that's why they attacked Egypt on 1943 but they were pushed away; Battle of El-Alamein. The British kept the Suez canal even after the declaration of the republic and when we took our canal back, they waged war against us. Same for Israel, the canal is important and they wanted whatever they thought they could have from it.


Quote:
Israel accepted the commission's verdict didn't they? Israel claims are mostly well-founded. What have the Islamic Arabs achieved by attacking the Jews for almost 100 years?
Ask the Arabs but, knowing how Israel works, I might have a hint.
Quote:
They didn't stop an Israeli state, they refused their part of the partition plan, their economy, education and technology is behind that of Israel and now they are fighting each other in an Arab Spring or civil war.
That goes more to who owns the land historically which isn't our topic. Second thing, the Arab Spring is their business not Israel's. The masses are trying to free themselves from dictatorship and picking their leaders, shouldn't be Israel's problem.
Quote:
The difference is that Israel solves its problems and the Arab states blames it problems on someone else, starting with Israel and the US. Iran even blamed bad weather on the West!
I'd like to see how Israel solves their political problem and the settlements. Also how they will get the world and the UN to not recognize them as an occupational force. Yet, Israel doesn't also come up and keep saying "Oh, we need buffer zones because all our problems come from the Arabs?" "We built a second Berlin wall so we can keep the Palestinian terrorists away" When Israel says that it just gets ignored by you, eh?

Quote:
If the Palestinians wouldn't have attacked Israel and the Jews there wouldn't be any blood.
Could be, or maybe if the Jews didn't come from Europe to what was the British Mandate of Palestine there wouldn't be any blood either? Not our topic again, but, I'll say something, I read somewhere that Muslims and Jews lived peacefully during the mandate and they used to babysit each others and stuff like that.
August 5th, 2013  
udaka
 
What is wrong with people who support the Israeli here?

Jews went to the land of others race and found their countries, built a cowhouse fenced the Palestinians , are not Palestinians innocent?
August 12th, 2013  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips

"You're just talking nonsens." (sic.)...... and everyone knows that you've already been told several times, that there was NEVER any claim that he was dead at that time.
NEVER ?

From your beloved The Guardian:

Moments later, Mohammed is dead and his father severely wounded

Or what about this (from The Independent) : "...Abu Rahma, the freelance cameraman who shot the scene, of lying when he told an investigation a month after the incident that, “I can confirm that the child was intentionally and in cold blood shot dead and his father injured by the Israeli army.” ..."

Look very good at the picture. The father is severely wounded yet no bulletholes nor any blood is to be seen. It is FAKE

They said the child died of a abdominal wound. (the boy's abdominal organs had been expelled and were lying outside his body) Do you know what seppuku is? The kaishaku (decapitation)is performed to relieve the samurai from his suffering. Most of the time the kaishaku was performed immediately after or sometimes before the samurai plunges his sword into his abdomen. This was done because the pain of a abdominal wound is unbearable. Yet the child lies there as if nothing happend. No blood. No screaming. No spasmodic movements because of the pain. It is FAKE

Quote:
(1). Israel is still unable to produce Mohammad al Durrah.
He propably married in 2007. Why don't they come forward with that person so they show that Israel is wrong?

Quote:
(2). Israel never took up the offer of his father to have the body exhumed and independently forensically tested, because they KNEW he was killed by their troops.
How naive can you be? Hamas will never allow Israeli investigators to dig up the body and Jamal al-Durrah knows it.
BTW why don't the Palestinians do it?

Quote:
Already shown to be false many times, Palestine was SUGGESTED as the site for a Jewish homeland as were Canada, Kenya and even Tasmania. This suggestion was never ratified as it contravened the obligation of the league of Nations to oversee the administration of the land in the interests of it's people until they could take over.
How stupid can you be?

The Palestine Mandate
"...the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty..."
declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917
"...the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people..."
Quote:
You are as usual just making up your story as you go along.
“You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.”
― Abraham Lincoln

Quote:
Bye, bye idiot.
CU

PS: new facts comming up soon! Get your sedatives ready.
August 12th, 2013  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
---snip--
CU

PS: new facts comming up soon! Get your sedatives ready.
What,... you mean that the Israeli 432nd. Hasbara Corps are still busy fabricating "evidence" in this long settled case?

The facts as they stand, are known. So unless the Israelis have found and can produce Mohammad al Durrah nothing will change, and even IF he was produced, it will not change a thing. The Israelis are still a murderous occupying force who like to create terror among those who resist, by their persistent over reaction and deliberate murder of non Jews. (e.g. Rachel Corrie)... I guess you are also going to tell us that there's new evidence she's alive and well also, living incognito on the French Riviera?

You realise that this new "evidence" will need to be corroborated by credible non pro Zionazi sources if it is to be believed.

To be absolutely honest, with your past record, I wouldn't believe you if you told me the Pope was a Catholic.
 


Similar Topics
Israel rightfully own the West Bank .
Israel strikes Beirut suburb, tightens blockade
A conversation with Iranian dissident (MUST READ)
Palestinians
American racism