Hamas admits it lied about Casualties... Yet some RJers still attempt to spam & perpetuate those propaganda lies-for-the-cause?!

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 04, 2010 2:57 PM GMT
    http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hF7u6SVbHfZSeLKnM97LlsaGWg_Q?docId=CNG.af5a1cb25e03ecc70924e5a7787c7aa3.831

    || GAZA CITY, Palestinian Territories (AFP) – A senior Hamas official [interior minister Fathi Hammad] admitted on Monday that up to 300 [more] fighters were killed in the 2008-2009 Gaza war after the Islamist group initially put the toll at 48.

    || "They say the people suffered from this war, but is Hamas not part of the people? On the first day of the war Israel targeted police stations and 250 martyrs were killed, from Hamas and other factions," he told the paper.

    || "In addition to them, between 200 and 300 fighters from the Al-Qassam Brigades (Hamas's armed wing) and another 150 security forces were martyred."

    Let's do the math: 250 + (200 to 300) + 150 = (600 to 700)

    Note that amongst the "Police officers" were members not just of Hamas' armed wing, but also terrorist fighters from "other factions" (e.g. Islamic Jihad). Make no mistake, these weren't simply civil police officers who handle domestic disputes and write traffic tickets but trained terrorists. In a separate interview in the Christian Science Monitor, a Hamas leader explained that "two thirds of Hamas policemen are police by day and Al Qassam by night." [The Al Qassam Brigades are the armed terrorist wing of Hamas]

    [Edit: and this doesn't include terrorists from other factions, e.g. Islamic Jihad & PRC, who weren't "police officers," that were killed.]

    This figure is close to the Israeli figure of 709 terrorists killed in combat operations (which was sufficiently detailed as to list the names of most of those killed).

    Just goes to show you whose figures you can trust and whose you will live to regret if you believe them.
    (The Israeli figures could be off by some 10%, but the Hamas figure [of 48] was off by 14x, that's 1400%)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 04, 2010 8:07 PM GMT
    Caesarea4 said


    Dude, many armies and militant groups throughout history have lied about the losses they have taken in combat for different kinds of strategic and tactical reasons. Hamas did it this time and admitted it now. However, your conclusion that this shows Hamas as pathological liars, and Israelis as always truthful, is completely unwarranted.

    Also, how convenient that you don't reference the most shocking statistics in the article:
    Palestinian death toll (according to Israeli military): 1,166
    Palestinian death toll (according to independent Israeli and Palestinian human rights groups): 1,400 "mostly civilians"
    Israeli death toll (according to Israeli military): 13 "including 10 soldiers"

    If we do the math, we will see the ratio of total casualties was about 100 Palestinians for each Israeli. Ouch!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 04, 2010 9:06 PM GMT
    Open_Minded10> the ratio of total casualties

    is completely irrelevant.

    What conclusion should we draw from the fact that more Germans were killed during WW II than Americans, British and French - combined?

    There are many reasons for the ratio:

    Israel issues its soldiers body armor. Hamas issues suicide bomb belts.
    Israel builds bomb shelters for its population. Hamas uses its population as human shields, launching rockets from amidst the population.
    Hamas terrorists seek the glory of martyrdom. Israelis seek to stay alive.

    Just imagine, if you can, that instead of "cowardly blending" and hiding amongst its population that Hamas would have fired rockets from open areas outside Gaza City. The mini-war would have been over in hours and few (if any) Palestinian Arab civilians would have died. I'm not sure that any more Hamas terrorists would have been killed... so why didn't Hamas do so? (Or, better yet, why didn't they extend the ceasefire rather than launch hundreds of rockets at Israeli civilians?)

    Before you go off in the wrong direction, let me stress that Israel's response was proportionate to the THREAT. The threat, not the damage - as if Israel had to wait for some lucky hits by unguided rockets and the death of dozens of civilians before it could take action. No country would turn a blind eye to hundreds of rockets raining down on its population simply because not enough civilians were killed yet for it to strike back.


    In any event, now that we know the real numbers in Gaza, let's hope that the "others" (e.g. pouncer, tokugawa, sxydrkhair and ianct) will stop spamming the old lies. Otherwise we might conclude that the "strategic and tactical reasons" remain to build a false propaganda "model" on fake "data" regardless of the truth, i.e. to lie-for-the-cause.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 04, 2010 11:56 PM GMT
    pouncer to "open_minded"> it would harm neither of our causes just to let the thread die.

    What "cause" is that, pouncer? Obviously it's not truth!

    You'd think pouncer would be happy to get corrected information.
    To the contrary, he attempts his usual personal attacks in an attempt to divert.

    p> the as always wildly divergent body counts issued by Israel and by those whose business it is to count bodies.

    Except that they usually aren't divergent, as in this case where - now that the dust has settled - we see that the Israeli figures were correct (or very close).

    There also aren't organizations "whose business it is to count bodies". Many of the organizations depend on counts supplied to them by groups such as Hamas.


    p> lies about Hamas using "human shields"; and launching rockets from amidst civilian populations

    So you are denying that Hamas launched rockets from amidst residential neighborhoods?!
    Yet in the next step, he attempts to justify that:

    p> the Gaza Strip is one of the most densely populated areas of land in the world, and that Israel could easily attack any Hamas MoD or military headquarters were it to be declared to the public

    Gaza's population density is about the same as Tel Aviv's, and about 1/10th that of the most densely populated areas in the world - but this is an argument against yourself. Why would anyone launch rockets from amidst such a densely populated area?

    Pouncer gives us the answer: to save the skin of the Hamas gunners, who otherwise would be easy picking.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 05, 2010 1:47 AM GMT
    Caesarea4 said

    the ratio of total casualties is completely irrelevant.

    What conclusion should we draw from the fact that more Germans were killed during WW II than Americans, British and French - combined?

    There are many reasons for the ratio:

    Israel issues its soldiers body armor. Hamas issues suicide bomb belts.
    Israel builds bomb shelters for its population. Hamas uses its population as human shields, launching rockets from amidst the population.
    Hamas terrorists seek the glory of martyrdom. Israelis seek to stay alive.

    Before you go off in the wrong direction, let me stress that Israel's response was proportionate to the THREAT. The threat, not the damage - as if Israel had to wait for some lucky hits by unguided rockets and the death of dozens of civilians before it could take action. No country would turn a blind eye to hundreds of rockets raining down on its population simply because not enough civilians were killed yet for it to strike back.



    Two things:

    1. I can't believe you are still comparing the multilateral war on Nazi Germany (an imperial, genocidal state) with the Israeli slaughter of Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip (a people suffering the hardships of occupation on a daily basis for decades). This is another one of those bogus rhetorical questions that Israeli supporters love to ask in order to distract and confuse others.

    2. You can come up with all kinds of reasons to explain the mind-boggling ratio of casualties---and please feel free to get creative and add to the list. The most popular explanation---the idea that Hamas hides behind human shields---is one of those simple talking points that people like you repeat over and over again without really looking into what it means in the context of a military operation.

    If you were at least relatively familiar with the principles of distinction and proportionality under international humanitarian law (something tells me that you are not), you would understand that attacks on military targets that inevitably damage civilians are only considered legal whenever the level of damage to civilians is proportional to the immediate military advantage anticipated---and not to some future threat!

    You should read the last sentence carefully again. The IDF would never get away with saying they were justified in using significant force because the rocket threat was on the rise. Were the IDF to make this argument you just made, they would be in some pretty serious legal trouble. So please stop making this argument right now.

    In order to prove it acted in accordance with legality, the IDF needs to prove that it could not have accomplished its military objectives without inflicting such alarmingly high levels of damage on the civilian population, including the 1,400 Palestinian, mostly civilian deaths. International observers understand that this is an extremely hard case for Israel to make. Has Israel seriously made this case? No. Has Israel collaborated with investigations into the matter? No. What has been Israel's response to the allegations and suspicions? Denial and silence.

    Israel's lack of cooperation with these investigations is certainly worrisome. When South African jurist Richard Goldstone (a man of an impeccable political reputation in his troubled country) was appointed to head an investigation into the matter, the Israeli government decided not to cooperate and then went on to dismiss the finished report as one-sided. Typical, of course.

    But the meticulously researched report speaks for itself, and the vast majority of its findings are compatible with other reports independently compiled by other human rights organizations on the ground. Although still controversial on some points, it certainly establishes the conclusion that Israel (and not Hamas) is primarily responsible for both the high number of Palestinian deaths and the destruction of Palestinian infrastructure given its sloppy, irresponsible handling of the principles of distinction and proportionality. Here is more information about the report for our readers: http://www.scribd.com/doc/21219870/goldstone-report-executive-summary

    And I'll tell you, the number of total Palestinian deaths was so unbelievably high primarily because according to the IDF, most political and administrative institutions and staff in Gaza were part of what they called the "Hamas terrorist infrastructure" and were targeted accordingly--even when the connection between these institutions and military action against Israel has never been established. Launching full frontal attacks against police facilities, for example, simply because a few policemen were suspected militants, was one of the several criminal actions undertaken by the military. Not to mention the fact that on several occasions during the operation, the IDF engaged in indiscriminate and deliberate attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure. Make no mistake, 1,400 Palestinian deaths in three weeks is an alarming number. I'll post once again the link to the Goldstone Report, just because it's that impressive: http://www.scribd.com/doc/21219870/goldstone-report-executive-summary

    Please Caesarea4, stop repeating sound bites and get informed!


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 05, 2010 5:35 AM GMT
    sxydrkhair> Let's not forget how many Israeli soldiers use Palestinian children as human shields

    WHAT?! You are trying to say that it is OK for Hamas to use 1.5 million Gazans as human shields (firing rockets from behind them) because there are a few cases of Israeli soldiers using people as shields (rarely if ever in live fire situations)?

    Once again we see that samxr's agenda isn't defending his brethren but rather using them to try and vilify Israel.


    You'd think pouncer would be happy to get corrected information.

    Evidently not. He prefers the false "data" because it is convenient.


    p> the as always wildly divergent body counts issued by Israel and by those whose business it is to count bodies.

    Except that they usually aren't divergent, as in this case where - now that the dust has settled - we see that the Israeli figures were correct (or very close).

    p> Who's figures?

    That would be "Whose", Mr. ESL.

    Did you skip over the OP?
    Or are you in denial about the Hamas admissions?


    p> lies about Hamas using "human shields"; and launching rockets from amidst civilian populations

    So you are denying that Hamas launched rockets from amidst residential neighborhoods?!

    p> I never said that.

    Yes, you did. You said that claiming that Hamas has used its own population as human shields is a "lie".


    Yet in the next step, he attempts to justify that

    p> I never sought to "justify" anything - only to explain what you had spinned.

    Except that I didn't spin, you did.
    Just as you now spin your justification as merely an explanation.


    p> the Gaza Strip is one of the most densely populated areas of land in the world, and that Israel could easily attack any Hamas MoD or military headquarters were it to be declared to the public

    Gaza's population density is about the same as Tel Aviv's, and about 1/10th that of the most densely populated areas in the world

    p> It's a bullshit comparison. Gaza is a territory

    So you prefer that I say that it's population density is comparable to Gibraltar?

    What's "bullshit" is your sloganeering. Gaza is primarily a city and its population density is unremarkable as such.
    Only a propagandist would keep bringing up such an irrelevant point.

    But he can't stop himself:

    p> Tel Aviv, being a city (definition: highly populous urban area - almost all countries have them), is seven times smaller in area than Gaza

    And yet it has 1/4 the population of Gaza, meaning that the population density is actually nearly 2x as high (and yet ranks #12 in Israel alone).

    Now compare to the size and density of the metro Tel-Aviv area. It's an area 4x larger than Gaza.


    p> If the Gaza Strip were to tomorrow become a country - it'd be the second most densely populated nation in the world (after Monaco).

    And Monaco is reknown across the world for its population density problems. Not!
    Because despite being a country, Monaco is an urban area.

    It's further odd how you attempt to argue that poor Gaza could hardly be a country (it's even smaller than, gasp, Delaware) and yet you now compare it to a country that is less than 1% of its size.

    Again, there's nothing special about Gaza's population density. It's not different from that of any primarily urban area. Word games such as calling it a "territory" or labeling it a [potential] "country" (neglecting that most of it is still urban) is idiotic.


    This is an argument against yourself. Why would anyone launch rockets from amidst such a densely populated area?

    p> ?


    Pouncer gives us the answer: to save the skin of the Hamas gunners, who otherwise would be easy picking.
    They are hiding behind their own population, using them as human shields.


    p> ?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 05, 2010 2:56 PM GMT
    There's nothing special about Gaza's population density. It's not different from that of any primarily urban area. Word games such as calling it a "territory" or labeling it a [potential] "country" (neglecting that most of it is still urban) is idiotic.

    pouncer> that the civilian "population" in Gaza is omnipresent, and that just about EVERWHERE constitutes a "civilian neighbourhood"

    Except that this isn't true:
    GazaMapOpenAreas2.jpg

    Gaza city is at the far left, Sderot (the favorite target because it's large enough that they can at least hope to hit something) is at the far right. Look at all the open areas in between!

    So now pouncer is just lying to cover up - lying-for-the-cause - as everyone can see from the satellite image. Had Hamas or Islamic Jihad wanted to fire rockets from non-urban areas, they could. in fact, they're even closer to Israel, so they could then not only reach deeper into Israel but also avoid hitting their own population when rockets misfire.


    Why would anyone launch rockets from amidst such a densely populated area?

    p> ?


    Pouncer gives us the answer: to save the skin of the Hamas gunners, who otherwise would be easy picking.
    They are hiding behind their own population, using them as human shields.

    p> [Obviously doesn't care for Palestinian Arab civilians and is willing to sacrifice them in his war against Israel and all things Jewish.]

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 05, 2010 3:25 PM GMT
    Caesarea4 said



    So you keep parroting the same silly argument?

    I gave you evidence that the actions of Hamas--questionable as they may be--should not have resulted in 1,400 mostly civilian Palestinian deaths. Everybody and their mother understand this. Everybody and their mother understand that this number is so ridiculously high for a three week-long military operation that there is no way but to assume the IDF violated the principles of distinction and proportionality discussed in my previous post.

    Since one cannot condemn the IDF without sufficient evidence that they indeed committed any violations, several investigations were called for after the operation, such as the one headed by Richard Goldstone. The IDF refused to cooperate, so the investigating team had to be exhaustive in considering all the available evidence.

    The results: the IDF failed to properly differentiate civilians and militants (not because Hamas hid among civilians, but because of the IDF's ridiculous doctrine that all administrative and political institutions and staff in Gaza are part of the "Hamas terrorist infrastructure" even when the connection between these institutions and military action against Israel has never been established. Indiscriminate attacks took place as well. And so did attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure. The IDF may call these attacks mistakes if they want to, but they are not collaborating with anyone investigating the matter. These findings, as I already told you, are consistent with the results of additional investigations conducted by independent human rights groups on the ground. Here is more information about the report: http://www.scribd.com/doc/21219870/goldstone-report-executive-summary/

    Of course, if you think the report is one-sided---a ridiculous claim that Israeli hardliners usually make without even reading the report and tracing its sources---then please explain to me why the Israeli government would refuse to disclose information about its operations and collaborate in some capacity with the investigation. If they had nothing to hide, then why would they be afraid of public scrutiny?

    Caesarea4, stop parroting the same silly arguments, and get informed!


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 05, 2010 3:33 PM GMT
    sxydrkhair> IDF soliders using Palestinians as human shields all the time.

    As you just posted, that happens rarely and Israeli soldiers have been prosecuted and convicted of wrong-doing.

    I'll add that the cases are qualitatively different. Israeli soldiers have used people to knock on (armed) neighbors' doors to urge them to come out peacefully, a case samxr loves to spam is a photo of a teenager on the hood of a police car that was being pelted with "stones" (which, when thrown at Israelis, he assures us can do no damage). I'm not aware of any instances where Israeli soldiers fired live fire from behind human shields - which is what Hamas and other Palestinian Arab terrorist groups do.


    sxydrkhair> I don't agree that Hamas was using Palestinians as human shields. It their first time

    ROTFL. First he denies it (which is a lie) and then in the very next sentence he admits it but pretends it was the "first time" (another lie)!?

    Every time Hamas/IJ/PRC launches a rocket or mortar from urban areas they are using the people living there as human shields (to deter Israel from returning fire, and giving them a propaganda victory if it does and civilians are harmed). There have been THOUSANDS of such attacks over the last decade. There have been dozens of Palestinian Arabs killed by misfired rockets falling in Gaza as well as "work accidents" (e.g. bomb labs in civilian areas blowing up).

    Once again we see that samxr isn't the least bit concerned with the safety of Gazans and the Palestinian Arabs, he - like the terrorist groups - is willing to sacrifice them for the cause.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 06, 2010 12:06 AM GMT
    I'm still waiting to read the "point by point" rebuttal to my last two posts.

    Caesarea4, where are you?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 06, 2010 3:53 AM GMT
    pouncer> All the "wide open spaces" he observes are...in Israel!!

    So they didn't teach you how to read a map in your madrassah?

    The map I provided depicts the border: It's the dashed line.
    And there are open spaces not just on the Israeli side but also in Gaza.
    (As your own maps also show!)

    Here, take another look:
    GazaMapOpenAreas4.jpg
    And:
    GazaMapOpenAreas3.jpg

    If you were shooting at "S", why do so from "A" rather than open areas - in Gaza! - "B" or "C"?

    Consider the inherent and characteristic contradictions in pouncer's argument. On one hand he argues that Gaza is not like a city (an urban area) because it is a "territory" and allegedly a prospective "country". The next minute he's arguing that its completely an urban area with no open spaces...

    On one hand he pretends to have been in Gaza, but not only can't he post a picture of him there (at least not one that matches his profile photo), but had he been there he'd know not only that there are open areas but that there is nothing remarkable about Gaza's population density.

    Now that we've clarified the maps:

    Had Hamas or Islamic Jihad wanted to fire rockets from non-urban areas, they could. in fact, they're even closer to Israel, so they could then not only reach deeper into Israel but also avoid hitting their own population when rockets misfire.

    Why would anyone launch rockets from amidst such a densely populated area?


    Pouncer gives us the answer: to save the skin of the Hamas gunners, who otherwise would be easy picking.
    They are hiding behind their own population, using them as human shields.
    How many Gazan civilians can be wasted to protect one Hamas gunner?

    Obviously pouncer doesn't care for Palestinian Arab civilians and is willing to sacrifice them in his war against Israel and all things Jewish.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 06, 2010 5:02 AM GMT
    Is it any wonder that sxydrkhair, who thinks he can simultaneously argue both X and NotX (depending on the "context"), is also challenged by causality?

    For example, sxydrkhair frequently argues that Israel established Hamas (he initially claimed in the 1970s but had to modify it to 1987 when I pointed out to him that Hamas only came to be that year - which underscores how the "facts" are invented to suit the story). Now he's arguing that Hamas was born as a result of Israel's alleged "war crimes"?! (For the logic challenged: both those claims can't be true, htough both can be and are false, )

    The reality is that Israel was being attacked by terrorists operating in southern Lebanon prior to Hizbullah's birth just as Israel was being attacked


    But why is sxydrkhair fleeing from and attempting to divert the discussion?

    sxydrkhair> I don't agree that Hamas was using Palestinians as human shields. It their first time

    ROTFL. First he denies it (which is a lie) and then in the very next sentence he admits it but pretends it was the "first time" (another lie)!

    Every time Hamas/IJ/PRC launches a rocket or mortar from urban areas they are using the people living there as human shields (to deter Israel from returning fire, and giving them a propaganda victory if it does and civilians are harmed). There have been THOUSANDS of such attacks over the last decade. There have been dozens of Palestinian Arabs killed by misfired rockets falling in Gaza as well as "work accidents" (e.g. bomb labs in civilian areas blowing up).

    Samxr, do you agree with Hamas' strategic choice to use its civilians - your alleged brethren (not that you act like you care about them) - as human shields? If not, then why are you covering up for this? First lying that it didn't happen, then admitting that it did but lying that it was the "first time"?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 06, 2010 2:27 PM GMT
    I didn't change the "focus".
    I provided the same map again, pointing out areas "A", "B", "C" and "S".
    I zoomed in to totally make clear how you blatantly lied, again, when you claimed the open areas were in Israel, not Gaza.

    You continue to lie-for-the-cause:

    p> The land you depict is barely anything - it's the distance between the village I live in and the village nextdoor. Actually, it's the difference between my street and one on the other side of town.

    Despite your natterings, we have established beyond any doubt that there are open areas in Gaza. Areas that are closer to Israel. Firing from those areas would be advantageous because they could reach deeper into Israel and rockets which misfire wouldn't fall on their own people.

    Yet Hamas and Islamic Jihad gunners don't fire from those areas. As you told us, doing so would be very dangerous for them. So they fire their rockets from the midst of the civilian population, hiding behind the civilians, using 1.5 million Gazans as human shields in gross violation of the Geneva Conventions. (These Conventions are only relevant for them when they, hypocritically, wish to accuse Israel of alleged violations.)

    Pouncer is perfectly OK with this. He lies in attempts to avoid condemning it and he justified it to protect the safety of the terrorist gunners. To him, like to samxr and others, the safety of the population is secondary.

    Indeed, it's a win-win for them. Not only are the Arab terrorists protected by the civilians (to hopefully live to perpetrate more acts of terrorism against innocent Israeli civilians) but if Israel shoots back and civilians are killed, they can use that for their anti-Israel propaganda (e.g. accusing Israel of violating the Geneva Conventions despite the responsibility of these deaths falling on those who intentionally put them in harms way, the terrorist gunners.)

    Again we clearly see that they are more concerned with attacking Israel/Jews than they are with the safety and welfare of the people of Gaza. For these faux humanitarians, the people are just pawns who can be sacrificed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 06, 2010 4:57 PM GMT
    Caesarea4 said


    Caesarea4, do you ever get tired of parroting the same old baseless, fallacious arguments?

    By the way, I'm still waiting for the "point by point" rebuttal to my last two posts. I mean, you said that's what you normally do, no?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 07, 2010 2:11 AM GMT
    Well I see that anything with some folks that's done by Israel is still always right, whats Israels is Israels, whats in the west bank is Israels to claim, to carve up, to destroy, to settle, to build on. The Gaza strip is for all intents and purposes, Israels version of an internment camp.The current inhabitants are not people like the Israeli's, their interests are of no consequence, only those of Israel because their god gave it to them according to some story Abraham passed down and on and on and on it goes, Whatever Israel does is right, whether they say up is down, right is left, wrong is right and no treaties are legitimate unless its to their benefit. The Israeli Lobby here in the US, and its members placed in our government are keeping us embroiled in a mess in the middle east that needs to end once and for all for the sake of peace. The USA should point blank tell the Israeli lobby and the Israeli leaders that either the settlements stop or our billions of dollars of financial support stop. The whole world sees through this bullshit especially the middle eastern countries, we look like f'n fools to give them all that financial support only for them to turn around and use the money to lobby us and keep us embroiled in a mess to our own detriment. Follow the money and it will lead right to the basis of a lot of our troubles. Between our coddling Israels blatantly one sided stances and our "oil interests" in that part of the world and you'll find the basis for most terrorism. Oh but don't tell this truth cause its antisemetic and anti patriotic !!!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 07, 2010 2:35 AM GMT
    pouncer> Just a few words on Israel's continuous playing of the Holocaust card

    Fail. No one has mentioned the Holocaust here or most anywhere else in any of the political discussions about the mideast.
    Trying to divert and change "focus" from the topic?


    I didn't change the "focus".
    I provided the same map again, pointing out areas "A", "B", "C" and "S".
    I zoomed in to totally make clear how you blatantly lied, again, when you claimed the open areas were in Israel, not Gaza.


    p> C4: I didn't change the "focus".
    [a little later on]: I zoomed in.

    Yup, the two are different things, as already explained in my comment.
    SInce your English is so broken (It's your mother tongue...really?), let's see if dictionary.com can help you:

    Focus: a central point
    Zoom: a subject, scene, or action is brought closer

    So rather than "change the focus", I zoomed in on the same focus, to rub your nose in your lie.


    We have established beyond any doubt that there are open areas in Gaza.

    p> There are "open areas" at both the front and back end of my house. And there are parks and playing fields in every major city and urban area. If Gaza were Manhattan, and Israel were the Bronx, it'd be like asking Hamas to fire its rockets from Central Park instead of from Spanish Harlem.

    Still lying? Your analogy would only be correct if Cenral Park were an open area between Manhattan and the Bronx.


    p> assuming Hamas in future just sneak into the "open space" just outside Beit Hanoun and lob a few rockets over the border, how long do you think it'd take for them to decamp back to Beit Hanoun? Or even Gaza City? Hardly dangerous at all.

    So why do they choose, instead, to fire rockets from inside Gaza City and Beit Hanoun?!

    If it is no more dangerous than firing rockets from the open areas (no scare quotes needed) outside of town then the problem isn't that they are cowards but much more serious. They are trying to get their own civilians killed in Israel's return fire in order to use that (as you guys do) for propaganda purposes.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 07, 2010 3:02 AM GMT
    p> 14 different different ways in which the term "focus" may be used.

    Ergo an admission that there was no contradiction in my comments.


    We have established beyond any doubt that there are open areas in Gaza.

    p> assuming Hamas in future just sneak into the "open space" just outside Beit Hanoun and lob a few rockets over the border, how long do you think it'd take for them to decamp back to Beit Hanoun? Or even Gaza City? Hardly dangerous at all.

    So why do they choose, instead, to fire rockets from inside Gaza City and Beit Hanoun?!

    If it is no more dangerous than firing rockets from the open areas (no scare quotes needed) outside of town then the problem isn't that they are cowards but much more serious. They are trying to get their own civilians killed in Israel's return fire in order to use that (as you guys do) for propaganda purposes.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 07, 2010 5:53 AM GMT
    you know, I'm embarrassed and put upon by most of my relatives, too, C4 . . . so, I feel your pain . . . but you and your cousins should take your ridiculous blood feud elsewhere, like some other planet . . . further, you, as a non-believer, have no reason, other than some bizarre blood theory worthy of Himmler, to be so exercised about all this . . .
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 07, 2010 8:45 AM GMT
    We have established beyond any doubt that there are open areas in Gaza.

    p> assuming Hamas in future just sneak into the "open space" just outside Beit Hanoun and lob a few rockets over the border, how long do you think it'd take for them to decamp back to Beit Hanoun? Or even Gaza City? Hardly dangerous at all.

    So why do they choose, instead, to fire rockets from inside Gaza City and Beit Hanoun?!

    If it is no more dangerous than firing rockets from the open areas (no scare quotes needed) outside of town then the problem isn't that they are cowards but much more serious. They are trying to get their own civilians killed in Israel's return fire in order to use that (as you guys do) for propaganda purposes.


    p> Israel will always respond to any rocket attack - be it launched from a beach or a dyke or a city or a croft or a hamlet or a savannah or a tree house - by shelling Gazan urban areas.

    The usual reversal of the scientific method - positing a premise masquerading as a conclusion.

    Were this true, not only would roughly half of the casualties in Gaza be female (the figure is less than 1/10th of that!) but given the THOUSANDS of rocket attacks on Israel we'd expect that all of Gaza would resemble Nahr el Bared (95% of which was destroyed by the Lebanese Army).

    So your premise is clearly false.

    Not to mention that it was just avoiding the question.

    WHY DO HAMAS GUNNERS CHOOSE TO FIRE ROCKETS FROM INSIDE GAZA CITY AND BEIT HANOUN GIVEN THE AVAILABILITY OF OPEN AREAS OUTSIDE THE CITY WHICH ARE ALSO CLOSER TO URBAN TARGETS IN ISRAEL?

    Firing from these open areas has no drawback (given pouncer's other premise, that there is no danger to the gunners to do so) and mulitple benefits: they can fire deeper into Israel and rockets that mis-fire wouldn't fall on Gazan civilians).

    Still, the Hamas and other terrorists choose to fire their rockets from inside cities.
    Either this offers them protection over firing from the open areas.
    Or they want civilians to be killed by return fire for propaganda purposes.
    Or is it "win-win" for the Palestinian Arab terrorist groups, they are safer and may score propaganda points with the useless idiots?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 5:27 PM GMT
    Isn't it amazing how the "usual suspects" continue to regurgitate their spam propaganda lies?

    In another topic:

    pouncer> nearly 1,400 killed of whom four-fifths were civilians and 350 children

    What does it tell us about pouncer that he continues to spread Hamas' lies even after Hamas has admitted them?!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2010 1:58 AM GMT
    Caesarea4 saidIsn't it amazing how the "usual suspects" continue to regurgitate their spam propaganda lies?

    In another topic:

    pouncer> nearly 1,400 killed of whom four-fifths were civilians and 350 children

    What does it tell us about pouncer that he continues to spread Hamas' lies even after Hamas has admitted them?!



    caesarea4, when was the last time you got some? you seem pretty desperate.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2010 3:22 AM GMT
    Well here you are again Ceaserea4, on another topic, telling all the RJ members just how right you are, just how right everything is that Israel does, regardless what the rest of the world says or thinks. Your drumming this beat from every possible angle is OBNOXIOUS !!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2010 4:31 AM GMT
    Isn't it funny how, incapable of addressing the topic, we get personal attacks?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2010 6:42 AM GMT
    Caesarea4 saidIsn't it funny how, incapable of addressing the topic, we get personal attacks?


    Hahaha... This is what you do time and again. You respond to reasonable arguments of all different stripes with the same obnoxious attitude, so that when people get sick of your bullshit and call you on it, you can play innocent and pretend you were trying to have a civilized conversation all along.

    I'm still trying to understand what kind of sick pleasure you derive from all this. I don't think you understand it yourself. If you haven't considered therapy, maybe you should.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2010 1:56 PM GMT
    You doth project too much.

    Now back to substantive discussion:

    How "open_minded" can he be?

    OM> full frontal attacks against police facilities, for example, simply because a few policemen were suspected militants, was one of the several criminal actions undertaken by the military

    Hamas Admission in OP> two thirds of Hamas policemen are police by day and Al Qassam by night
    Hamas Admission in OP> from Hamas and other factions

    The 1/3rd of the "policemen" who were not members of the Al Qassam terrorist brigade likely belonged to "other factions" (e.g. Islamic Jihad).


    OM> Here is more information about the report for our readers: http://www.goldstonereport.org/

    From your own source:

    •The report violates international standards for inquries, including UN rules on fact-finding, replicating earlier UNHRC biased statements.
    •The Commission systematically favored witnesses and evidence put forward by anti-Israel advocates, and dismissed evidence and testimony that would undermine its case.
    •The Commission openly denies a presumption of innocence to the Israelis accused of crimes (while honoring Hamas’ presumed innocence) and acknowledges that it made accusations of crimes without proof that would stand up in court.
    •The Commission distorted legal standards, imposing on Israel standards that reverse their generally understood and applied meaning, while ignoring important rules of international law that put the onus of responsibility on an organization as base, by Goldstone’s own standards, as Hamas.


    OM> the IDF needs to prove that it could not have accomplished its military objectives without inflicting such alarmingly high levels of damage on the civilian population

    ROTFL. So in your "open mind" Israeli is guilty until proven innocent?


    Israel's response was proportionate to the THREAT. The threat, not the damage - as if Israel had to wait for some lucky hits by unguided rockets and the death of dozens of civilians before it could take action. No country would turn a blind eye to hundreds of rockets raining down on its population simply because not enough civilians were killed yet for it to strike back.

    OM> attacks on military targets that inevitably damage civilians are only considered legal whenever the level of damage to civilians is proportional to the immediate military advantage anticipated---and not to some future threat!

    I made no mention of some potential "future threat" but discussed the present and imminent threat.
    Let's further look at what is actually stipulated by the:

    Fourth Geneva Convention> The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.

    Amnesty International> [Hamas] rendered [civilian] locations possible targets of attack and therefore exposed civilians who may have been present to risk.

    Regarding "proportionality": If a dozen or a thousand people armed with knives or pitchforks advance toward your position (ignoring warnings to stop), you can shoot them before they reach you and start killing your people as long as they continue rushing you. The response is "proportionate", even if all of them are killed and you suffer no injuries. It is proportionate to the threat, not to the number killed or damage done.

    Amnesty International> Whether or not [rocket] attacks actually result in civilian casualties, they are in violation of international law, which also prohibits attacks aimed at spreading terror among the civilian population. The patterns of attacks and statements by members and leaders of Palestinian groups also indicate that they have no qualms about launching attacks against civilians and that they in fact carry out such attacks intending to kill and injure Israeli civilians. Such attacks constitute war crimes.

    Israel was under no obligation to wait until more of its civilians were murdered or injured before it took action to take out the rocket launchers - which posed a present and imminent threat.

    Hopefully you now understand that "proportionality" has nothing at all to do with death ratios.