Pampal !

You will get UG coming after you and calling you :

A closet Nazis who really hate them because they are Jewish, or brain-dead trendies who want to be fashionable and repeat left-wing rhetoric like parrots! as he did to me !

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/200812...arty_to_murder/

Miggy,

That report had summarized what I was not able to put down in words.

Thank you.

On the contrary, zaza is no Nazi.

Clueless in Gaza

By David Solway, FrontPageMagazine

The recent outbreak of hostilities between Israel and Hamas should give us an opportunity to reflect, once again, not only on the current belligerents, but on the role of the obligatory third party to the conflict. I refer to the ground troops of the armies of the liberal-left, aka the Western media, who inevitably tilt the balance of the war they are “covering” in favor of their confederates or, what amounts to the same thing, against the side they reprove. Thus, from the media’s squint-eyed parallax, Hamas is more sinned against than sinning and Israel is either wholly, largely or, at best, equally responsible for the “renewal” of violence in the region.

“Renewal,” of course, is the wrong word in the context, since the six month “truce” prior to the latest round of fighting was consistently broken by Hamas and its affiliate terror groups; and a veritable barrage of Kassams, Katyushas and Grads preceded the belated Israeli response.

But we would hardly have known this had we relied solely on the mainstream press whose reporters, as usual, have been recruited to shill for the enemy. Echoing Mission Control—the UN, the NGOs and many Western politicians—even those news outlets which profess to be “even-handed” invariably fault Israel for using “disproportionate” force to counter the torrent of missiles upon its towns and kibbutzim. Reports almost always describe Hamas rockets as makeshift, innocuous and sporadic. After all, why should a couple of stray missiles per day falling on one’s community like annual precipitation, maybe killing or maiming one’s neighbour—or oneself—disturb one unduly? But as Liat Collins mordantly observes, “just how many missiles a day are acceptable depends on how far you are from their range” (Jerusalem Post, December 28, 2008).

Israel will no doubt do it's best to live up to the various agreements, while the other side will do their best to skirt around them and continue to attack the Jews.

There can be only one outcome to this sad tale. It is quite obvious, but also quite unacceptable (to most).

Palestinian Refugees have the right to return to their homes in Israel.

General Assembly Resolution 194, Dec. 11, 1948

"Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible."

Israel's occupation of Palestine is Illegal.

Security Council Resolution 242, Nov. 22, 1967

Calls for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from territories occupied in the war that year and "the acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force."

Israel's settlements in Palestine are Illegal.

Security Council Resolution 446, March 22, 1979

Blah, blah, blah...

Amazing what those Arab oil dollars will buy.

How Corrupt Is the United Nations?

Claudia Rosett

April 2006

Recent years have brought a cascade of scandals at the United Nations, of which the wholesale corruption of the Oil-for-Food relief program in Iraq has been only the most visible. We still do not know the full extent of these debacles—the more sensational ones include the disappearance of UN funds earmarked for tsunami relief in Indonesia and the exposure of a transnational network of pedophiliac rape by UN peacekeepers in Africa—and we may never know. What we do know is that an assortment of noble-sounding efforts has devolved into enterprises marked chiefly by abuse, self-dealing, and worse.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarti...-nations--10049

The UN is certainly a disappointment, but every major player must share part of the blame.

Much is made of Russia using it's power of veto in the security council but the US and the UK do the same. Any attempt to censor Israel over the current crisis will be blocked accordingly.

Since the Security Council's inception, China (ROC/PRC) has used its veto 6 times; France 18 times; Russia/USSR 123 times; the United Kingdom 32 times; and the United States 82 times.

Civilians shelled

The AFP news agency on Friday said the United Nations had cited witness accounts saying Israeli forces had moved about 110 Palestinians into a house which they then shelled 24 hours later, killing about 30 people.

AFP quoted an unidentified UN official as saying "according to several testimonies, on January 4, Israeli foot soldiers evacuated approximately 110 Palestinians into a single-residence house in Zeitun, warning them to stay indoors.

"Twenty-four hours later, Israeli forces shelled the home repeatedly, killing approximately 30."

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) called it "one of the gravest incidents since the beginning of operations" by Israeli forces in Gaza.

The dire humanitarian situation was not improving, our correspondent added, saying that aid agencies had made it clear that they could not act unless Israel provided them better security

The images of two women on the front page of an edition of The Washington Post last week illustrates how mainstream US media has been reporting Israel's war on Gaza. On the left was a Palestinian mother who had lost five children. On the right was a nearly equally sized picture of an Israeli woman who was distressed by the fighting, according to the caption.

As the Palestinian woman cradled the dead body of one child, another infant son, his face blackened and disfigured with bruises, cried beside her.

The Israeli woman did not appear to be wounded in any way but also wept.

Arab frustration

To understand the frustration often felt in the Arab world over US media coverage, one only needs to imagine the same front page had the situation been reversed.

If an Israeli woman had lost five daughters in a Palestinian attack, would The Washington Post run an equally sized photograph of a relatively unharmed Palestinian woman, who was merely distraught over Israeli missile fire?

When the front page photographs of the two women were published on December 30, over 350 Palestinians had reportedly been killed compared to just four Israelis.

What if 350 Israelis had been killed and only four Palestinians - would the newspaper have run the stories side by side as if equal in news value?

Like many major news organisations in the US, The Washington Post has chosen to cover the conflict from a perspective that reflects the US government's relationship with Israel. This means prioritising Israel's version of events while underplaying the views of Palestinian groups.

For example, the newspaper's lead article on Tuesday, which was published above the mothers' photographs, quotes Israeli military and civilian sources nine times before quoting a single Palestinian. The first seven paragraphs explain Israel's military strategy. The ninth paragraph describes the anxiety among Israelis, spending evenings in bomb shelters. Ordinary Palestinians, who generally have no access to bomb shelters, do not make an appearance until the 23rd paragraph.

To balance this top story, The Washington Post published another article on the bottom half of the front page about the Palestinian mother and her children. But would the paper have ever considered balancing a story about a massive attack on Israelis with an in-depth lead piece on the strategy of Palestinian militants?

Context stripped Major US television channels also adopted the equal time approach, despite the reality that Palestinian casualties exceeded Israeli ones by a hundred fold. However, such comparisons were rare because the scripts read by American correspondents often excluded the overall Palestinian death count.

By stripping the context, American viewers may have easily assumed a level playing field, rather than a case of disproportionate force.

Take the opening lines of a report filed by NBC's Martin Fletcher on December 30: "In Gaza two little girls were taking out the rubbish and killed by an Israeli rocket - while in Israel, a woman had been driving home and was killed by a Hamas rocket. No let up today on either side on the fourth day of this battle."

Omitted from the report was the overall Palestinian death toll, dropped continuously in subsequent reports filed by NBC correspondents over the next several days.

When number of deaths did appear - sometimes as a graphic at the bottom of the screen - it was identified as the number of "people killed" rather than being attributed specifically to Palestinians.

No wonder the overwhelmingly asymmetrical bombardment of Gaza has been framed vaguely as "rising tensions in the Middle East" by news anchors.

With the lack of context, the power dynamic on the ground becomes unclear.

ABC news, for example, regularly introduced events in Gaza as "Mideast Violence". And Like NBC, reporters excluded the Palestinian death toll.

On December 31, when Palestinian deaths stood at almost 400, ABC correspondent Simon McGergor-Wood began a video package by describing damage to an Israeli school by Hamas rockets.

The reporter's script can be paraphrased as follows: Israel wanted a sustainable ceasefire; Israel needed to prevent Hamas from rearming; Hamas targets were hit; Israel was sending in aid and letting the injured out; Israel was doing "everything they can to alleviate the humanitarian crisis". And with that McGregor-Wood signed off.

Palestinian perspective missing There was no parallel telling of the Palestinian perspective, and no mention of any damages to Palestinian lives, although news agencies that day had reported five Palestinians dead.

For the ABC correspondent, it seemed the Palestinian deaths contained less news value than damage to Israeli buildings. His narration of events, meanwhile, amounted to no less than a parroting of the official Israeli line.

In fact, the Israeli government view typically went unchallenged on major US networks.

The US media has been accused of prioritising Israel's version of events [EPA]

Interviews with Israeli spokesmen and ambassadors were not juxtaposed with the voices of Palestinian leaders. Prominent American news anchors frequently adopted the Israeli viewpoint. In talk show discussions, instead of debating events on the ground, the pundits often reinforced each other's views. Such an episode occurred on a December 30 broadcast of the MSNBC show, Morning Joe, during which host Joe Scarborough repeatedly insisted that Israel should not be judged.

Israel was defending itself just as the US had done throughout history. "How many people did we kill in Germany?" Scarborough posed.

The blame rested on the Palestinians, he concluded, connecting the Gaza attacks to the Camp David negotiations of 2000. "They gave the Palestinians everything they could ask for, and they walked away from the table," he said repeatedly.

Although this view was challenged once by Zbigniew Brzezinski, a former US official, who appeared briefly on the show, subsequent guests agreed incessantly with Scarborough's characterisation of the Palestinians as negligent, if not criminal in nature.

According to guest Dan Bartlett, a former White House counsel, the Palestinian leadership had made it "very clear" that they were uninterested in peace talks.

Another guest, NBC anchor David Gregory, began by noting that Yasser Arafat, the late Palestinian president, "could not be trusted", according to Bill Clinton, the former US president.

Gregory then added that Hamas had "undercut the peace process" and actually welcomed the attacks.

"The reality is that Hamas wanted this, they didn't want the ceasefire," he said.

Columnist Margaret Carlson also joined the show, agreeing in principal that Hamas should be "crushed" but voicing concern over the cost of such action.

Thus the debate was not whether Israel was justified, but rather what Israel should do next. The Palestinian human tragedy received little to no attention.

Victim's perspective Arab audiences saw a different picture altogether. Rather than mulling Israel's dilemma, the Arab news networks captured the air assault in chilling detail from the perspective of its victims. The divide in coverage was staggering.

For US networks, the bombing of Gaza has largely been limited to two-minute video packages or five minute talk show segments. This has usually meant a few snippets of jumbled video: explosions from a distance and a momentary glance at victims; barely enough time to remember a face, let alone a personality. Victims were rarely interviewed.

The availability of time and space, American broadcast executives might argue, were mitigating factors.

On MSNBC for example, Gaza competed for air time last week with stories about the economy, such as a hike in liquor sales, or celebrity news, such as speculation over the publishing of photographs of Sarah Palin's new grandchild.

Most US networks have reported exclusively from Israel [GALLO/GETTY] On Arab TV, however, Gaza has been the only story. For hours on end, live images from the streets of Gaza are beamed into Arab households.

Unlike the correspondents from ABC and NBC, who have filed their reports exclusively from Israeli cities, Arab crews are inside Gaza, with many correspondents native Gazans themselves.

The images they capture are often broadcast unedited, and over the last week, a grizzly news gathering routine has been established.

The cycle begins with rooftop-mounted cameras, capturing the air raids live. After moments of quiet, thunderous bombing commences and plumes of smoke rise over the skyline. Then, anguish on the streets. Panicked civilians run for cover as ambulances careen through narrow alleys. Rescue workers hurriedly pick through the rubble, often pulling out mangled bodies. Fathers with tears of rage hold dead children up to the cameras, vowing revenge. The wounded are carried out in stretchers, gushing with blood.

Later, local journalists visit the hospitals and more gruesome images, more dead children are broadcast. Doctors wrap up the tiny bodies and carry them into overflowing morgues. The survivors speak to reporters. Their distraught voices are heard around the region; the outflow of misery and destruction is constant.

Palestinian voices The coverage extends beyond Gaza. Unlike the US networks, which are often limited to one or two correspondents in Israel, major Arab television channels maintain correspondents and bureaus throughout the region. As angry protests take place on a near daily basis, the crews are there to capture the action live.

Even in Israel, Arab reporters are employed, and Israeli politicians are regularly interviewed. But so are members of Hamas and the other Palestinian factions.

The inclusion of Palestinian voices is not unique to Arab media. On a number of international broadcasters, including BBC World and CNN International, Palestinian leaders and Gazans in particular are regularly heard. And the Palestinian death toll has been provided every day, in most broadcasts and by most correspondents on the ground. Reports are also filed from Arab capitals.

On some level, the relatively small American broadcasting output can be attributed to a general trend in downsizing foreign reporting. But had a bloodbath on this scale happened in Israel, would the networks not have sent in reinforcements?

For now, the Israeli viewpoint seems slated to continue to dominate Gaza coverage. The latest narrative comes from the White House, which has called for a "durable" ceasefire, preventing Hamas terrorists from launching more rockets.

Naturally the soundbites are parroted by US broadcasters throughout the day and then reinforced by pundits, fearing the dangerous Hamas.

Arab channels, however, see a different outcome. Many have begun referring to Hamas, once controversial, as simply "the Palestinian resistance".

While American analysts map out Israel's strategy, Arab broadcasters are drawing their own maps, plotting the expanding range of Hamas rockets, and predicting a strengthened hand for opposition to Israel, rather than a weakened one.

.

.

Reason for edit: deleted stupid comment

The images of two women on the front page of an edition of The Washington Post last week illustrates how mainstream US media has been reporting Israel's war on Gaza. On the left was a Palestinian mother who had lost five children. On the right was a nearly equally sized picture of an Israeli woman who was distressed by the fighting, according to the caption.

As the Palestinian woman cradled the dead body of one child, another infant son, his face blackened and disfigured with bruises, cried beside her.

The Israeli woman did not appear to be wounded in any way but also wept.

You need to provide links to the sites where you get your information. For all we know, this could be from The Hamas Weekly and you could be leaving out information that was contrary to the point that you are attempting to make. That is standard on TV.

By the way, Israelis are being wounded and killed by the Palestinians, so it is rather silly to pretend that the newspapers can only find "distressed" Israelis to show in the paper. Sounds more like the newspaper is trying to direct all the public sympathy to the Palestinians just like you are.

.

Reason for edit: deleted stupid comment

Congratulations for catching it in time, I rarely do.

.

Reason for edit: deleted stupid comment

Congratulations for catching it in time, I rarely do.

Thank you very much, Old Croc.

Muslim voices courageously speaking out against Hamas.

Pro-Israel camp would be wise to heed Muslim cries for peace

By Roi Ben-Yehuda

As technology advances and televisions get flatter, bigger, and clearer, one subject will always be broadcast to the world in black and white: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The recent events in Gaza have engendered a predictable world reaction: polarization, anger, hatred, and fear. The left screams "massacre," while the right wants to get tougher.

Watching the mass protest and reading about strident calls for Israel's dissolution, we Jews can't help but get that lonely feeling in the pits of our stomachs: The world is against us. Call it a Pavlovian response conditioned by persecution on a mass scale.

But the pro-Israel camp would be wise to pay attention not only to the bellicose cries coming from the mosques and streets, but also to the Muslim voices courageously speaking out against Hamas.

The Muslim Canadian Congress, for example, has issued a statement holding Hamas responsible for precipitating the recent conflict in Gaza.

The statement begins by condemning the recent Israeli attacks in Gaza as "disproportionate," but quickly turns its attention to censuring Hamas. According to the congress, Hamas is responsible for using the Palestinian people as "human bait," in an effort to kindle an all-out war in Gaza.

In words that would have made Alan Dershowitz blush, the statement asserts that: "No other national liberation movement in modern history has offered martyrdom as a substitute to freedom and statehood. Hamas has set back the clock for the Palestinians and it is time for all Palestinians to recognize that Hamas offers only death, destruction and a place in Paradise, not a Palestinian State."

The columnist Mona Eltahawy, to give another example, who writes for Egypt's Al Masry Al Youm and Qatar's Al Arab, published a piece in which she lambasts Hamas and the Arab world for their self-destructive addiction to Israel.

"It is difficult to criticize Palestinians when so many have died this weekend," she writes, "but the Hamas rulers of Gaza are just the latest of their leaders to fail them. For those of us who long to separate religion from politics, Hamas has given the truth to the fear that Islamists care more about facing down Israel than taking care of their people. The Palestinians of Gaza are victims equally of Hamas and Israel."

Eltahawy originally published her article on Facebook, where bashing Israel is a full-time occupation. But even on the popular social networking site, a quick glance at some threads reveals that Muslim are far from intellectually monolithic on the operations in Gaza.

"Israel is no angel among nations," writes a man who identifies himself as a secular Muslim, "but Hamas is a disgrace to the freedom struggles of countless peoples - offering its own people to die so that it can serve some sick allegiance to Iran."

And putting the matter succinctly and evenly, one young Palestinian writes, "I've never felt so angry the way I do now? F%#K HAMAS, F%#K ISRAEL."

So what can we make of all this? Why are more Muslims publicly voicing their opposition to Hamas? Is this an example of buyer's remorse? Has Hamas' gross blundering of an occupation-free Gaza finally cost them the privilege of representing the Palestinian cause?

"The simple reason we see Muslims speaking out against Hamas," says the Muslim activist and writer, Raquel Evita Saraswati, "is that the organization has proved itself to be terrorist by nature and function; and while the larger Muslim community has always stated its rejection of terrorism, we see the pressing need to make our voices louder in these especially contentious times."

Many pro-Israel readers will see this statement, along with the ones above, and feel vindicated. But that would be a mistake. These letters should not be seen as an endorsement of Israel?s Spartan policies - which most of the writers correctly see as futile and morally abhorrent - but rather as a type of self-reckoning; a kind of honest awareness that is necessary for peace to flourish.

That said, the recognition that Israel is not always the problem and that occupation is not the only reason Palestinians fight is of no small significance. It is imperative, therefore, that we do what is in our power to ensure these voices are front and center competing in the great suk (market) of ideas, because once an idea is out there, it can never be un-thought.

Roi Ben-Yehuda is a writer based in N.Y.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1051597.html

Meanwhile children are dying.

well, back, again... ubg, its good that u have the patience to find quotes and things...

i really dont.

as of this morning, the hamas have refused the offer of the UN for a cease fire, as well as the israeli cabinet . both sides claim that the conditions the UN have drawn up dont have the interests of the israelis/palestinians at heart. so we are settling in to a war routine. hours of tv open to the news sites; inviting friends up to visit for relief from the mess in the south, and worried every time there is a phone call that some friend's kid is the soldier that is killed. and israeli news is not censuring too much of what is photoed in gaza; we are getting all the gazan bodies, crying children, etc, full cover. yesterday soldiers were interviewed while in gaza, they were handing out rations that they received, as well as food they get from worried parents sending packages thru the army , to gazan families: mostly milk, chocolate, bread, etc. xince the gazans are stuck without. our reporters are also interviewing gazans. unlike many countries, our reporters are getting the enemy side's point of view also... and reports from doctors and mothers and other civilians.

some interesting tidbits: the search dogs being used (one was killed in action two days ago and was given an army burial) are wearing soft boots on their paws, because they have to walk thru so much debris from the broken up buildings.

kerryd- its not just religioun, its water water and water.

off to my new hobby of tv watching...

till i have something interesting to report..

bina

israel

Correct me if I'm wrong, but was there ever a hue and a cry over "disproportionate response" when the US (and some others) invaded Afghanistan in response to 9/11 ?

Was it "disproportionate response" to invade Iraq over rumours of WMDs ?

What sort of response would be "proportionate" to the thousands of rockets and mortars that have been fired into Israel since Hamas gained control of Gaza ? What would the world's response be if Israel had acted in kind, and for every Hamas rocket, Israel indiscriminately fired one of it's own back into Gaza ?

I'm sure the world would be screaming like little girls with spiders on their dresses. Even if Israel were to fire their own rockets from areas where there were no civilian populations (unlike Hamas), they would still be viewed as the villain for having the audacity to retaliate against poor, misunderstood Hamas.

"Disproportionate response" ? What a crock of PC crap.

"Tsk tsk. Just because an internationally recognized terrorist group, who's avowed purpose is your utter extinction, fires a few thousand missiles and rockets at you, primarily from inhabited areas like cowards hiding behind women's skirts, you simply can't just wade in there with a well equipped professional army and try to stop them ! What kind of world do you think we live in Israel ?

You must use an appropriate, measured and "proportionate" response, that doesn't allow for any civilian casualties, despite Hamas's well known preference for hiding amongst it's own people, using them for shields against any retaliations.

We (the world) cannot tell you what an appropriate response would be though, because we wouldn't want to appear to be total jackasses by suggesting something like challenging Hamas to an arm-wrestling contest as an appropriate response. We also know that when we speak about "appropriate" responses, we are just blowing smoke out our asses, because if we were in the same position as you Israel, we would most likely act in the same manner.

But that would be OK for us to do the same thing, but it's not OK for you. You see, most of us (the world) needs the Arab oil like a junkie needs a fix. We have to appear to suck up to the Arab nations so they will continue to sell us their oil. That is why we continue to criticize everything you do, while remaining eerily silent on the actions of others (especially those that have oil).

So Israel, please be a good little nation, and just accept the fact that as long as you exist, you are going to be continually harassed by rockets, bomb, missiles and suicide bombers. Once you have accepted that the world (us) has determined this to be your fate, you can stop trying to defend yourself, and then we (the world) won't be able to accuse you of "disproportionate response" any more ! You see ? It's so simple ! Just bow down and let yourselves be slaughtered ! What could be easier ?

Hello ? Hello ? Israel ? Are you listening to us (the world) ? Hello ? Why aren't they listening to us ? Why aren't they submitting like abject, dismal sheep being led to slaughter ? Hello ? If you don't answer us Israel, we'll be forced to submit another strongly worded resolution to the UN ! Hello ? Are you there ? What's that ? We can't hear you over the roar of the Hamas rockets being fired from the inhabited areas around us !

What's that you say ? You're ignoring us ? Your turning a deaf ear to our requests that you allow yourselves to be exterminated ? Or was that, your ears are deaf from the thousands of rockets that have been fired at you ? Hello (dam_n, there goes another Hamas rocket from beside that school. At least they could wait until we've finished our..........whoosh........another one ! Good thing we (the world) continue to turn a blind eye to wherever they keep getting those things from. Now where were we ? Ah yes. Israel, are you still on the line ? Hello ? Ah there you are.

What's that ? The rockets ? Yes we've been watching them getting fired at you all day. Not to worry though, we're sure that you're used to the constant shelling by now, so there's no need for us (the world) to do anything about it.

Say again ? 30 minutes until what ? You can't be serious ! We have 30 minutes to get out of here, before you attack the site that's been firing those rockets at you ? But that would be a disproportionate response ! We (the world) simply can't have you doing that ! We'll have you know that we will fire off a strongly worded resolution if you dare defend yourselves !

Furthermore........hmmmm.....line seems to have gone dead.........maybe it's the batteries..... What's that you say Achmed ? All the civilians are running away ? Away from what ? They've been warned like we have ? Well, go down there and tell them to return. After all, we've threatened Israel with a strongly worded resolution, that should deter them !

I say there, what do you mean "every man for himself" ? And where the bloody hel_l are you going with my car ! Hello ! Hello !

dam_n inconsiderate of everyone to take off like that. Now who is going to serve me my tea and congratulate me on the fine way we've come up with to resolve the whole situation ? And what is that dam_n whistling noise ? I've a right mind to call the manager and give him a strongly worded...................kaaaBAAMMMMM........."

:D

Meanwhile children are dying.

On both sides.

You know, some days, most days actually, I wake up, put the kettle on, try to remember if I insulted anyone the night before and if I did how high are they on my 'do I care' list....... and then I spend few minutes on the net reading the news and realise how fcuked up we are as a civilisation.

Well said taddy!!!

i have to add this morning, after my nescafe, that there is no business like war business...

all of us here in the central areas are 'opening our hearst blablabla' for families etc... and so now all the stores hotels and other venues are offering special rates if u can prove that u are from the 'within 40 km' areas' (within the one minute get to the bombshelter areas)...

the war effort and all that....

soon we will be planting victory (or loss) gardens; well , the loss gardens are in the cemeteries for the most part, however

off to the north today to see lebanon.

)

bina

israel

Correct me if I'm wrong, but was there ever a hue and a cry over "disproportionate response" when the US (and some others) invaded Afghanistan in response to 9/11 ?

Was it "disproportionate response" to invade Iraq over rumours of WMDs ?

What sort of response would be "proportionate" to the thousands of rockets and mortars that have been fired into Israel since Hamas gained control of Gaza ? What would the world's response be if Israel had acted in kind, and for every Hamas rocket, Israel indiscriminately fired one of it's own back into Gaza ?

I'm sure the world would be screaming like little girls with spiders on their dresses. Even if Israel were to fire their own rockets from areas where there were no civilian populations (unlike Hamas), they would still be viewed as the villain for having the audacity to retaliate against poor, misunderstood Hamas.

"Disproportionate response" ? What a crock of PC crap.

I had a similar conversation today. What would I like to see England do if say the Welsh started throwing rockets at us? I think the answer would start with an "O" and end in "bliterate" and so what if people said we used a disproportionate response.

An interesting, but related, aside.

The Guantanamo Bay inmates the US asked Australia to take are apparently members of the Eastern Turkestan Islamic Movement, who if returned to China (who's demanding them) would be lucky to get out of the airport before receiving a bullet in the back of the head.

I'd like a ruling from our members on something which puzzles me.

Are these people anti-Communist freedom fighters or Muslim terrorists?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but was there ever a hue and a cry over "disproportionate response" when the US (and some others) invaded Afghanistan in response to 9/11 ?

Was it "disproportionate response" to invade Iraq over rumours of WMDs ?

What sort of response would be "proportionate" to the thousands of rockets and mortars that have been fired into Israel since Hamas gained control of Gaza ? What would the world's response be if Israel had acted in kind, and for every Hamas rocket, Israel indiscriminately fired one of it's own back into Gaza ?

I'm sure the world would be screaming like little girls with spiders on their dresses. Even if Israel were to fire their own rockets from areas where there were no civilian populations (unlike Hamas), they would still be viewed as the villain for having the audacity to retaliate against poor, misunderstood Hamas.

"Disproportionate response" ? What a crock of PC crap.

I had a similar conversation today. What would I like to see England do if say the Welsh started throwing rockets at us? I think the answer would start with an "O" and end in "bliterate" and so what if people said we used a disproportionate response.

Surely the Welsh would bombard us with sheep? If so the only answer would be to whip up a jug of mint sauce

MORE PROOF THAT HAMAS IS USING PALESTINIANS AS HUMAN SHIELDS

HAMAS' EVIL MAP

PLAN FOUND FOR CIVILIANS AS SHIELDS

UGLY TACTICS: A Hamas-drawn map of al-Atatra, Gaza, shows booby-trapped homes and snipers planted amid civilians.

Israeli soldiers yesterday discovered a hand-drawn Hamas map revealing how the terror group is exploiting Gaza's civilian population by deploying snipers, booby-trapping homes and planting bombs, officials said.

"Hamas makes cynical use of civilian homes," said Israel's chief intelligence officer, Brig. Gen. Yuval Halamish.

The map of the northern Gaza town of al-Atatra was translated on the scene and helped the Israeli troops in subsequent operations, he said.

The block-by-block sketch was apparently based on a view taken from Google Maps.

On the map, Hamas split up the town into three sectors - red, blue and green - and highlighted sites such as mosques, a gas station and a fuel depot, the Jerusalem Post and Yediot Ahronoth newspapers reported on their Web sites.

"You can see that the neighborhood was divided into three areas of fighting, according to color, and inside, the terrorists spread out a number of posts, planted explosive devices and posted sharpshooters," Halamish said.

"Inside the map, the terrorists also marked sniper positions, as well as the location of roadside bombs, anti-tank bombs and land mines."

Halamish said the map showed that Hamas does not hesitate to use the civilian population in carrying out its terrorist activity.

For example, a brown dot is marked next to a mosque, representing a nearby sniper position.

Pointing to one sector, Halamish said, "This is a civilian area, and you can see on the map how Hamas booby-trapped the entrance to homes in order to hit" Israeli forces.

In another case, a large explosive device was placed next to a gas station. Had it detonated, it would have likely destroyed the site, killing and wounding civilians who live in the area, he said.

Soldiers also discovered a mannequin dressed like a soldier at the entrance to a home, officials said.

Had soldiers entered the home, the mannequin would have exploded, collapsing the floor and causing the troops to fall into a tunnel, where they would have been held captive by Hamas operatives, he said.

Halamish added that the layout had been thoroughly planned in preparation for Israel's ground operation.

Meanwhile yesterday, the threat of a wider conflict arose when militants in Lebanon fired two rockets into northern Israel.

One rocket crashed into a retirement home, but there were no serious injuries. Israel responded with mortar shells. With Post Wire Services, January 9, 2009

[email protected]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but was there ever a hue and a cry over "disproportionate response" when the US (and some others) invaded Afghanistan in response to 9/11 ?

Was it "disproportionate response" to invade Iraq over rumours of WMDs ?

What sort of response would be "proportionate" to the thousands of rockets and mortars that have been fired into Israel since Hamas gained control of Gaza ? What would the world's response be if Israel had acted in kind, and for every Hamas rocket, Israel indiscriminately fired one of it's own back into Gaza ?

I'm sure the world would be screaming like little girls with spiders on their dresses. Even if Israel were to fire their own rockets from areas where there were no civilian populations (unlike Hamas), they would still be viewed as the villain for having the audacity to retaliate against poor, misunderstood Hamas.

"Disproportionate response" ? What a crock of PC crap.

I had a similar conversation today. What would I like to see England do if say the Welsh started throwing rockets at us? I think the answer would start with an "O" and end in "bliterate" and so what if people said we used a disproportionate response.

Surely the Welsh would bombard us with sheep? If so the only answer would be to whip up a jug of mint sauce

But how big would the jug have to be, to be disproportionate

I'd like a ruling from our members on something which puzzles me.

Are these people anti-Communist freedom fighters or Muslim terrorists?

The East Turkestan Islamic Movement are terrorists.

Meanwhile children are dying.

On both sides.

How many kids on the Israeli side?

Did you see the news these last few days? do you see how many Palestinian kids got killed?

A blinding flash of white light

Lit up the sky over Gaza tonight

People running for cover

Not knowing whether they're dead or alive

They came with their tanks and their planes

With ravaging fiery flames

And nothing remains

Just a voice rising up in the smoky haze

We will not go down

In the night, without a fight

You can burn up our mosques and our homes and our schools

But our spirit will never die

We will not go down

In Gaza tonight

Women and children alike

Murdered and massacred night after night

While the so-called leaders of countries afar

Debated on who's wrong or right

But their powerless words were in vain

And the bombs fell down like acid rain

But through the tears and the blood and the pain

You can still hear that voice through the smoky haze

We will not go down

In the night, without a fight

You can burn up our families and our homes and our schools

But our spirit will never die

We will not go down

In Gaza tonight

We will not go down

In the night, without a fight

You can burn up our mosques and our homes and our schools

But our spirit will never die

We will not go down

In the night, without a fight

We will not go down

In Gaza tonight

The Big lie