I know this is a joke, but the sad truth is that many people think of muslims/arabs when they hear the word terrorist.[/quote]
I wonder what ever led them to associate the two? Perhaps it has something to do with the 17000+ seperate Islamist terrorist attacks since 9/11 carried out by Muslims, in the name of their religion and whilst yelling ‘Allahu Akbar’?
Perhaps if Hindus had flown commercial airliners into skyscrapers and committed 17000+ seperate terrorist attacks in the last decade yelling ‘om mani padme hum’ and claiming religious justification for said attacks we’d associate Hindus with terrorism? Or is that too far fetched?[/quote]
Funny you should mention hindus. There have been prognom like actions against muslims in India, carryed out by hindus. I will try to find a source if you dont believe.
You seem like a guy who knows history sexmachine, and you should therefor also know that the term terroist have been used against enemys in many occasions, the british called for example george washington a terrorist. And our arab friend on this site is partly right: muslim para-militarys are called terrorist when they fight soldiers( wich is not an act of terrorism ), while israely, american or norwegian military personel are called soldiers when they perform terrorist acts( the bombing of gaza a few years ago was most definitly an act of terrorism, because the goal was to inflict death and terror on the population of gaza to scare them ). I dont no wich definition of terrorism you use, but mine is: civillian targets with the goal of inflicting terror/fear in the enemys. with that definition USA is a terroist state becuase of the nuclear attack on hiroshima and nagazaki, but nobody in the west defines america as an terrorist state because of this terrorist act and other horrible acts. And that probably because USA and the other western countrys are allys and because what defines USA is much more than terrorism. The same is true for HAMAS, FATHA ect, theire friends probably dont call them terrorists. They are probably looked on as political movements. Also for them who know HAMAS and FATHA more closely than from the idiotbox. The point is that most military organisations( be it states or non-state organisations ) perform or have performed terrorist acts and if we should call one terrorist, we must call all terrorists if we want to stay consistent.
The goal of the bombing in Gaza was NOT to ‘inflict death and terror on the population to scare them’. The goal was to stop the Qassam rocket barrages and to do everything possible to limit civilian casualties in the process. Hamas smuggling tunnels and weapons caches were targeted not civilians. In fact the IDF dropped over 2 million leaflets, made over 100000 phone calls and numerous radio broadcasts urging civilians to stay away from places where Hamas stored weapons.
Translation of leaflets:
'To the residents of the Gaza Strip
The IDF will act against any movements and elements conducting terrorist activities against the residents of the State of Israel.
The IDF will hit and destroy any building or site containing ammunition and weapons.
As of the publication of this announcement, anyone having ammunition and/or weapons in his home is risking his life and must leave the place for the safety of his own life and that of his family.
You have been warned.
IDF Command’
British commander describes Israel as ‘doing more to safeguard the lives of civilians in a war zone than any other army in the history of warfare’:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
The goal of the bombing in Gaza was NOT to ‘inflict death and terror on the population to scare them’. The goal was to stop the Qassam rocket barrages and to do everything possible to limit civilian casualties in the process. Hamas smuggling tunnels and weapons caches were targeted not civilians. In fact the IDF dropped over 2 million leaflets, made over 100000 phone calls and numerous radio broadcasts urging civilians to stay away from places where Hamas stored weapons.
Translation of leaflets:
'To the residents of the Gaza Strip
The IDF will act against any movements and elements conducting terrorist activities against the residents of the State of Israel.
The IDF will hit and destroy any building or site containing ammunition and weapons.
As of the publication of this announcement, anyone having ammunition and/or weapons in his home is risking his life and must leave the place for the safety of his own life and that of his family.
You have been warned.
IDF Command’
British commander describes Israel as ‘doing more to safeguard the lives of civilians in a war zone than any other army in the history of warfare’:
That is all true, but why did Israel bomb Gaza in 2008 with white phosphorus, an act against international law?
I’m not saying Israel is solely in the wrong. the Palestinians have committed countless atrocities but to imply Israel is completely innocent is a whitewash.
FTR before anyone jumps on my back I support Israel, its right to exist and its borders, and count Israelis amongst the friendliest people that I have known
That is all true, but why did Israel bomb Gaza in 2008 with white phosphorus, an act against international law?
I’m not saying Israel is solely in the wrong. the Palestinians have committed countless atrocities but to imply Israel is completely innocent is a whitewash.
FTR before anyone jumps on my back I support Israel, its right to exist and its borders, and count Israelis amongst the friendliest people that I have known
[/quote]
The use of phosphorous is NOT ‘against international law’
‘The use of white phosphorus as a weapon of war is not banned under international law’
White phosphorous was used to create cloud cover for IDF infantry.
The reason IDF infantry went in to Gaza was to limit civilian casualties which would have been far greater if artillery shelling/aerial bombardment was used instead. Israel put its own soldiers in harms way to limit Palestinian casualties.
I don’t claim Israel is blameless. As an outsider who has followed the course of events I can say that I honestly believe that they are doing a better job than any other country in the world would do in the same situation.
He worked as an doctor under the attacks on Gaza in 2008. And served as an eyewitness of the inhumanitarian
condtitions during the attacks. He is accused of being a shill for terrorist etc, but what he and the norwegian
medical team down there witnessed are true.
So with that as a background we can conclude to things.
If its true what sexmachine is saying( that Israel tried to prevent civillian casualties ), then they failed big time in that.
What sexmachine is saying is just an opinion and not a fact, and that israel launched the attack on Gaza
well knowing the death and terror that would follow such an attack.
[quote]brnforce wrote:<<< Hahahahahhahaha! So you’re sticking with the whole “not real followers” tactic? Please say you are being sarcastic. People can interpret things differently, who’s to say that you have it correct?[/quote]Every orthodox protestant denomination agrees on this. My church is working in cooperation with 500 other local congregations at the moment. Every last one I promise you will agree that no person attempting to enforce the gospel by force understands what the gospel is. This isn’t tough. Terrorism is by definition anti-Christian. My claim to being an artichoke doesn’t make me one.
[/quote]
The problem is that there are thousands if not millions of people who think they are Muslims through their interpretation of their religion and still commit terrorist acts. Christians have done the same thing on a large scale in the past as well. All religions are capable of horrible things as they are tied in with politics (unfortunately).[/quote]Lemme help ya out for second here. Pay attention now please.
When jihadist muslims declare theocratic conquest on the world by violent force they are acting IN ACCORD with their scriptures AND the historic roots of their religion. Bin Laden was correct in that he was faithfully following in the footsteps of his prophet.
When somebody perpetrates violence upon another in the name of the Christian Gospel of Jesus Christ they are acting IN DEFIANCE of the Christian scriptures AND the historic roots of their faith.
Now did ya see that?!?!? One is being TRUE to it’s bloodthirsty barbaric roots and one is CONTRIVING bloodthirsty barbaric roots.
See, this is why you have to dig around to find some alleged violent “Christian” outfit while the Mohammedans openly kill everybody in their way.
Hang on now. Ya ready? There IS such a thing as a world view, religious or otherwise, toward which tolerance is both unwarranted AND self destructive. WHOA!!! I hope everybody was sittin down for that one.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Dr Mads Gilbert’s Hamas links exposed. CNN pulls fake video. Dr Mads Gilbert identified as one of two people faking CPR on ‘dead child’ video:
two doctors where showned the clip you are talking about and they concluded it was
genuin.
And Cnn did never give in to the critics and refuted the claims that it was face point by
point.
Dr. Gilbert is a controversial figure no dont and he has said some stupid shit in the past, but he is also an world aclaimed doctor and he and dr.Fosse where in Gaza during the attacks.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Dr Mads Gilbert’s Hamas links exposed. CNN pulls fake video. Dr Mads Gilbert identified as one of two people faking CPR on ‘dead child’ video:
two doctors where showned the clip you are talking about and they concluded it was
genuin.
And Cnn did never give in to the critics and refuted the claims that it was face point by
point.
Dr. Gilbert is a controversial figure no dont and he has said some stupid shit in the past, but he is also an world aclaimed doctor and he and dr.Fosse where in Gaza during the attacks.
[/quote]
Scroll down wikipedia to the sources. The source for that statement(35) was a piece by CNN defending their decision to stand by the fake video. CNN have now pulled the fake video and are no longer standing by it.
[quote]florelius wrote:
Funny you should mention hindus. There have been prognom like actions against muslims in India, carryed out by hindus. I will try to find a source if you dont believe.
You seem like a guy who knows history sexmachine, and you should therefor also know that the term terroist have been used against enemys in many occasions, the british called for example george washington a terrorist. And our arab friend on this site is partly right: muslim para-militarys are called terrorist when they fight soldiers( wich is not an act of terrorism ), while israely, american or norwegian military personel are called soldiers when they perform terrorist acts( the bombing of gaza a few years ago was most definitly an act of terrorism, because the goal was to inflict death and terror on the population of gaza to scare them ). I dont no wich definition of terrorism you use, but mine is: civillian targets with the goal of inflicting terror/fear in the enemys. with that definition USA is a terroist state becuase of the nuclear attack on hiroshima and nagazaki, but nobody in the west defines america as an terrorist state because of this terrorist act and other horrible acts. And that probably because USA and the other western countrys are allys and because what defines USA is much more than terrorism. The same is true for HAMAS, FATHA ect, theire friends probably dont call them terrorists. They are probably looked on as political movements. Also for them who know HAMAS and FATHA more closely than from the idiotbox. The point is that most military organisations( be it states or non-state organisations ) perform or have performed terrorist acts and if we should call one terrorist, we must call all terrorists if we want to stay consistent.
[/quote]
It’s nice it know someone has a brain and avoids the hypocrisy that is so common with many Americans on what is and isn’t terrorism (although I realize you’re from Norway).
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Dr Mads Gilbert’s Hamas links exposed. CNN pulls fake video. Dr Mads Gilbert identified as one of two people faking CPR on ‘dead child’ video:
two doctors where showned the clip you are talking about and they concluded it was
genuin.
And Cnn did never give in to the critics and refuted the claims that it was face point by
point.
Dr. Gilbert is a controversial figure no dont and he has said some stupid shit in the past, but he is also an world aclaimed doctor and he and dr.Fosse where in Gaza during the attacks.
[/quote]
Scroll down wikipedia to the sources. The source for that statement(35) was a piece by CNN defending their decision to stand by the fake video. CNN have now pulled the fake video and are no longer standing by it.[/quote]
I checked reference 35, at it was a video where they refuted the claim.
Do you have link that proves that it is fake, and this time not som hardcore-consevative link.
Have to go to work, but let us continou this later on.
I checked reference 35, at it was a video where they refuted the claim.
Do you have link that proves that it is fake, and this time not som hardcore-consevative link.
Have to go to work, but let us continou this later on.
[/quote]
After further investigation it appears you may be right. The accusations of fakery were made due to the inadequate chest compressions shown in the televised section of the video, Dr Gilbert’s character/motivations and the history of staged videos that emanate from the territories.
I am willing to withdraw my accusations of fakery, however the fact remains that Israel did not deliberately target civilians and Dr Mads Gilbert has a history of lying about and distorting events for political reasons. It also seems very odd to me that he would stand by why someone who has no idea what they’re doing attempts CPR with totally inadequate chest compressions. The two Doctors who viewed the video describe him as ‘showing the assistant how to do it properly’. He allowed the assistant to attempt CPR for some time before his demonstration.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
After further investigation it appears you may be right. The accusations of fakery were made due to the inadequate chest compressions shown in the televised section of the video, Dr Gilbert’s character/motivations and the history of staged videos that emanate from the territories.
[/quote]
The reasons those who in the first place claimed it to be fake, is for us unknow, but we can offcourse speculate. It could be an honest mistake as you are proposing or it could be an attempt at hurting the credibility of gilbert.
The fact that you are able to do this shows that you are an honest poster, good to have you here
Could you expand on the history of “gilberts lying and distorting for political reasons”, I where not aware that he does this.
Maybe he thougt the assistent where capable of doing a chestcompression, but againg who knows why.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
Wow, what a wonderful way to water down the word “terrorist” till it has all but no meaning.
Have you ever been to Hiroshima? To the Peace Memorial Park? It’s something everyone should do. For many different reasons.
Hiroshima was a MILITARY headquarters for the Japanese Imperial army and navy. The place was an intelligence center and a staging ground for aggressive actions in Asia. There was / is an island off the main land mass were poisonous gas was being manufactured (some of which was put in little hot air balloons and aimed to float toward the US).
There is all kinds of controversy about “why” the bombs were dropped (which by the way really did relatively little damage compared to some other events of WWII), but one could hardly say that the primary goal was to “terrorize” the innocents.
How you can equate acts like the A-Bomb (during all out wartime) with flying planes into skyscrapers and blowing up trains is beyond me.
Unless, of course “terrorism” has no real meaning. [/quote]
If you want to rationalize about the a-bomb over japan while the rest of the world agrees it was an horrible act and it should never happen again. Then have fun, because I aint joining.
As far as I know they dropped the bomb well knowing that civillians where going to die and with the purpose of scare of japan as much that they would surrender. That fits my definition, but I guess its many out there and terrorist is today a meaningless word, you could probably replace it with militant muslim and know one would notice.
ps. I dont use the word terrorist myslelf, because its so muddy and it always follows an entire semantic debate after. I wiew as namecalling, in short something you call the enemys to make them look worse.
[quote]florelius wrote:
Funny you should mention hindus. There have been prognom like actions against muslims in India, carryed out by hindus. I will try to find a source if you dont believe.
You seem like a guy who knows history sexmachine, and you should therefor also know that the term terroist have been used against enemys in many occasions, the british called for example george washington a terrorist. And our arab friend on this site is partly right: muslim para-militarys are called terrorist when they fight soldiers( wich is not an act of terrorism ), while israely, american or norwegian military personel are called soldiers when they perform terrorist acts( the bombing of gaza a few years ago was most definitly an act of terrorism, because the goal was to inflict death and terror on the population of gaza to scare them ). I dont no wich definition of terrorism you use, but mine is: civillian targets with the goal of inflicting terror/fear in the enemys. with that definition USA is a terroist state becuase of the nuclear attack on hiroshima and nagazaki, but nobody in the west defines america as an terrorist state because of this terrorist act and other horrible acts. And that probably because USA and the other western countrys are allys and because what defines USA is much more than terrorism. The same is true for HAMAS, FATHA ect, theire friends probably dont call them terrorists. They are probably looked on as political movements. Also for them who know HAMAS and FATHA more closely than from the idiotbox. The point is that most military organisations( be it states or non-state organisations ) perform or have performed terrorist acts and if we should call one terrorist, we must call all terrorists if we want to stay consistent.
[/quote]
It’s nice it know someone has a brain and avoids the hypocrisy that is so common with many Americans on what is and isn’t terrorism (although I realize you’re from Norway).[/quote]
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
More than 3/4 of all Palestinian casualties in Gaza were militants. Numerous instances of recording militants as civilians exposed:
[/quote]
295 civilians dead, are 295 to many. especially those 89 kids.
For starters not bomb Gaza, a tiny place with a huge underaged population.
Is it something we have learned from modern warfare, is that the civilians is always the victim, either by death, injury or worsening of theire humanitarian conditions. And the people who make decisions about going or not going to war are well aware of this.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
More than 3/4 of all Palestinian casualties in Gaza were militants. Numerous instances of recording militants as civilians exposed:
[/quote]
295 civilians dead, are 295 to many. especially those 89 kids.
For starters not bomb Gaza, a tiny place with a huge underaged population.
Is it something we have learned from modern warfare, is that the civilians is always the victim, either by death, injury or worsening of theire humanitarian conditions. And the people who make decisions about going or not going to war are well aware of this.
[/quote]
