corrupt US government blocks UN from having an independent investigation into 61 murdered palestines

[Shusha]

So did the conflict start in 1967 or in 2006?

When did the conflict start? Pick your date. Pick the event which 'started' the conflict. Remembering that your claim is that those who 'start' the conflict have no right to defend themselves.

I think I was pretty clear. The occupation started in '67 and the blockade began in 2006. In both times, you are at fault, because those were YOUR decisions.

Now, don't take what I said about the right to defend yourselves out of context. Everyone has a right to defend themselves, however, what I said in regards to the occupation, blockade and Palestinian resistance, is that you cannot claim self defense when you respond. As long as you continue the occupation and blockade, it is not self defense, it is aggression.

End the occupation and blockade, then, and only then, will it become self defense if you are attacked.

Occupation against Gaza ended in 2005.

The blockade which occurred after that time is a direct response to continued aggression against Israel. Stop the aggression and there is no need for a blockade.

The risk to Israel for ending the blockade is the deaths of thousands or tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of citizens and an end to Jewish sovereignty and safety.

The risk to Gaza of ending the aggression against Israel is nothing. And actually the potential is enormous.

 

[Anathema]

You think it is okay to murder anyone you don't like?

I believe that anyone stupid enough to threaten me, my family or my property is going to regret that mistake permanently.

If I were to murder everyone I don't like there'd be less people left on Earth than Noah supposedly brought onto his Ark.

 

[fncceo]

You are not outraged when innocents are killed!

Are you?

 

[USAF 2023]

You are not outraged when innocents are killed!

Are you?

He doesn’t care as long as they are Israelis

 

[P F Tinmore]

Ah. So how do you figure out who 'started' a conflict? Because it seems to me that amassing tens of thousands at a border with intent to cross it and rip hearts out is starting something

You started the occupation in '67 and the blockade in 2006.

You started it!

So did the conflict start in 1967 or in 2006?

When did the conflict start? Pick your date. Pick the event which 'started' the conflict. Remembering that your claim is that those who 'start' the conflict have no right to defend themselves.

1917

 

[Coyote]

Seriously. I teach self-defense. When someone comes at you with a knife, you don't wait til he kills you with it before you defend yourself.

You also don't go looking for potential knife killers BEFORE they attack you do you? Maybe you do?

Your apologetics for Islamic terrorists is really rather ugly.

But yes, going around looking for potential Islamic terrorist knife killers, suicide bombers, rental truck applicants, etc., is an effective tool to prevent gee-had attacks. You may have read that not just Israel but the entire western world has found a need to protect themselves from the very Islamic terrorists you defend.

They weren't all Islamic terrorists. I hate to let you down here but not all Muslims and not all Palestinians are terrorists.

 

[fncceo]

Ah. So how do you figure out who 'started' a conflict? Because it seems to me that amassing tens of thousands at a border with intent to cross it and rip hearts out is starting something

You started the occupation in '67 and the blockade in 2006.

You started it!

So did the conflict start in 1967 or in 2006?

When did the conflict start? Pick your date. Pick the event which 'started' the conflict. Remembering that your claim is that those who 'start' the conflict have no right to defend themselves.

1917

70 CE

 

[P F Tinmore]

Ah. So how do you figure out who 'started' a conflict? Because it seems to me that amassing tens of thousands at a border with intent to cross it and rip hearts out is starting something

You started the occupation in '67 and the blockade in 2006.

You started it!

So did the conflict start in 1967 or in 2006?

When did the conflict start? Pick your date. Pick the event which 'started' the conflict. Remembering that your claim is that those who 'start' the conflict have no right to defend themselves.

1917

70 CE

If the Arab, Muslims didn't get there until later it was not their fault.

 

[Hollie]

Seriously. I teach self-defense. When someone comes at you with a knife, you don't wait til he kills you with it before you defend yourself.

You also don't go looking for potential knife killers BEFORE they attack you do you? Maybe you do?

Your apologetics for Islamic terrorists is really rather ugly.

But yes, going around looking for potential Islamic terrorist knife killers, suicide bombers, rental truck applicants, etc., is an effective tool to prevent gee-had attacks. You may have read that not just Israel but the entire western world has found a need to protect themselves from the very Islamic terrorists you defend.

They weren't all Islamic terrorists. I hate to let you down here but not all Muslims and not all Palestinians are terrorists.

It may hurt your feelings to realize that I never claimed all Moslems or all Arabs-Moslems are terrorists.

That does nothing to minimize the threat that Islamic terrorists pose to the West.

 

[member]

Distance is irrelevant. Throw a rock at me from 20 feet away you're gonna get shot.

The Pali's need to accept their place and move on, or find done meaningful way to bri g zisrael to the table. Getting their asses smoked for throwing rocks isn't gonna do it.

You can only use deadly force if your life is threatened. Is your life threatened by someone throwing a rock 300 feet away? Throwing a rock is not a capital crime. If you don't see how wrong it is to shoot someone for throwing a rock, then you don't know the basic difference between right and wrong.

Israel is wrong. And they should be investigated for their crimes.

". . .Throwing a rock is not a capital crime. If you don't see how wrong it is to shoot someone for throwing a rock, then you don't know the basic difference between right and wrong. . ."

omg.


". . .you don't know the basic difference between right and wrong..."

listen to you try to justify terrorists' actions [rocket launching, *suicide bombers,* underground smuggling tunnels, rubbing elbows with al qu and iran, brainswashing children into becoming terrorists, recruiting women as terrorists]...




". . .you don't know the basic difference between right and wrong..."

​

 

[Billo_Really]

Are you?

I'm outraged.................you provided pictures with no content.

Although, it is nice to see there is an apparent investigation going on. There should be more of those.

 

[Billo_Really]

I believe that anyone stupid enough to threaten me, my family or my property is going to regret that mistake permanently.

If I were to murder everyone I don't like there'd be less people left on Earth than Noah supposedly brought onto his Ark.

I have a better metaphor.

You build a fence on your neighbors front lawn that goes across his driveway and prevents him from leaving his house to go to work. As a result, he is unable to take care of his family. The only way he survives, is when people toss him food from the street. And if that wasn't bad enough, every time he walks out on to his front lawn, you shoot at him.

So he finally has enough of you and your fence and asks you to remove it. You respond by killing his brother. He asks you again. You respond by killing his daughter. He yells at you to get that fence off his property. You respond by killing his wife. He then throws a rock at you. You respond by killing him.

Should you be investigated for vandalism? Or murder? Or should local authorities forget the whole incident ever took place?

 

[Billo_Really]

Occupation against Gaza ended in 2005.

The blockade which occurred after that time is a direct response to continued aggression against Israel. Stop the aggression and there is no need for a blockade.

The risk to Israel for ending the blockade is the deaths of thousands or tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of citizens and an end to Jewish sovereignty and safety.

The risk to Gaza of ending the aggression against Israel is nothing. And actually the potential is enormous.

If the occupation ended, why can't Gazans fish and farm without getting shot at? If the occupation ended, why can't Gazans export their products to market? If the occupation ended, why do they get shot at while baking bread? While playing soccer? If the occupation ended, why can't they have a picnic without you shooting tear gas at their babies?

You murder 61 of them in cold blood and have the nerve to say there is no occupation? You do all that and feel you should not be investigated for war crimes? You are really out there!

Do you think (or do you care) how crazy you sound, by going from 26 deaths in 17 years, to hundreds of thousands of deaths, if the blockade is lifted?

Listen very carefully, you are responsible for the things you do. There will be an investigation. And you will be held accountable for all of this shit. Just like Nuremberg!

 

[Billo_Really]

Hard eyeroll.

No one shot a can of tear gas at an eight month old baby as a deliberate act. There was a violent riot where non-lethal riot suppression measures were being taken. Everyone was aware of that fact. Someone brought a baby to a violent riot. The baby had an existing heart condition. The baby died. It has nothing at all to do with Israel.

I defend the defense of Israel and her citizens against violent attacks. Absolutely justifiable.

If you want to argue that there was absolutely NO threat to Israel and it was a perfectly peaceful protest, I have only to provide a few instances of lethal, violent action to prove you wrong. And there are PLENTY of those to go around.

A threat from 300 meters?

Another eye roll.

 

[fncceo]

Occupation against Gaza ended in 2005.

The blockade which occurred after that time is a direct response to continued aggression against Israel. Stop the aggression and there is no need for a blockade.

The risk to Israel for ending the blockade is the deaths of thousands or tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of citizens and an end to Jewish sovereignty and safety.

The risk to Gaza of ending the aggression against Israel is nothing. And actually the potential is enormous.

If the occupation ended, why can't Gazans fish and farm without getting shot at? If the occupation ended, why can't Gazans export their products to market? If the occupation ended, why do they get shot at while baking bread? While playing soccer? If the occupation ended, why can't they have a picnic without you shooting tear gas at their babies?

You murder 61 of them in cold blood and have the nerve to say there is no occupation? You do all that and feel you should not be investigated for war crimes? You are really out there!

Do you think (or do you care) how crazy you sound, by going from 26 deaths in 17 years, to hundreds of thousands of deaths, if the blockade is lifted?

Listen very carefully, you are responsible for the things you do. There will be an investigation. And you will be held accountable for all of this shit. Just like Nuremberg!

 

[Billo_Really]

There is something wrong with looking at your dumb bird while watching The Full Monty at the same time.

 

[admonit]

Occupation against Gaza ended in 2005.

The blockade which occurred after that time is a direct response to continued aggression against Israel. Stop the aggression and there is no need for a blockade.

The risk to Israel for ending the blockade is the deaths of thousands or tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of citizens and an end to Jewish sovereignty and safety.

The risk to Gaza of ending the aggression against Israel is nothing. And actually the potential is enormous.

Listen very carefully, you are responsible for the things you do. There will be an investigation. And you will be held accountable for all of this shit. Just like Nuremberg!

Aren't you yet tired of your own bullshit, Billo?

 

[Hollie]

Hard eyeroll.

No one shot a can of tear gas at an eight month old baby as a deliberate act. There was a violent riot where non-lethal riot suppression measures were being taken. Everyone was aware of that fact. Someone brought a baby to a violent riot. The baby had an existing heart condition. The baby died. It has nothing at all to do with Israel.

I defend the defense of Israel and her citizens against violent attacks. Absolutely justifiable.

If you want to argue that there was absolutely NO threat to Israel and it was a perfectly peaceful protest, I have only to provide a few instances of lethal, violent action to prove you wrong. And there are PLENTY of those to go around.

A threat from 300 meters?

Another eye roll.

You need to get past your childish banter. The Islamic terrorists at the Tire Burning Riot publicity stunt were attempting to breach a security fence protecting Israeli citizens. Had they done that, they were an immediate threat to Israeli citizens.

Maybe if you paid attention?

 

[USAF 2023]

Distance is irrelevant. Throw a rock at me from 20 feet away you're gonna get shot.

The Pali's need to accept their place and move on, or find done meaningful way to bri g zisrael to the table. Getting their asses smoked for throwing rocks isn't gonna do it.

You can only use deadly force if your life is threatened. Is your life threatened by someone throwing a rock 300 feet away? Throwing a rock is not a capital crime. If you don't see how wrong it is to shoot someone for throwing a rock, then you don't know the basic difference between right and wrong.

Israel is wrong. And they should be investigated for their crimes.

". . .Throwing a rock is not a capital crime. If you don't see how wrong it is to shoot someone for throwing a rock, then you don't know the basic difference between right and wrong. . ."

omg.


". . .you don't know the basic difference between right and wrong..."

listen to you try to justify terrorists' actions [rocket launching, *suicide bombers,* underground smuggling tunnels, rubbing elbows with al qu and iran, brainswashing children into becoming terrorists, recruiting women as terrorists]...




". . .you don't know the basic difference between right and wrong..."

​

He knows it. He just has a Double Standard

 

[Shusha]

Occupation against Gaza ended in 2005.

The blockade which occurred after that time is a direct response to continued aggression against Israel. Stop the aggression and there is no need for a blockade.

The risk to Israel for ending the blockade is the deaths of thousands or tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of citizens and an end to Jewish sovereignty and safety.

The risk to Gaza of ending the aggression against Israel is nothing. And actually the potential is enormous.

If the occupation ended, why can't Gazans fish and farm without getting shot at? If the occupation ended, why can't Gazans export their products to market? If the occupation ended, why do they get shot at while baking bread? While playing soccer? If the occupation ended, why can't they have a picnic without you shooting tear gas at their babies?

You murder 61 of them in cold blood and have the nerve to say there is no occupation? You do all that and feel you should not be investigated for war crimes? You are really out there!

Do you think (or do you care) how crazy you sound, by going from 26 deaths in 17 years, to hundreds of thousands of deaths, if the blockade is lifted?

Listen very carefully, you are responsible for the things you do. There will be an investigation. And you will be held accountable for all of this shit. Just like Nuremberg!

See, here's the thing. You can't make a real argument here. You have to exaggerate and lie and deny reality and appeal to emotion in order to make your case sound in any way reasonable.

No Gazan is being shot for baking bread or fishing or playing soccer or having a picnic. They are being shot when they threaten Israel by smiuggling weapons or attacking her border.