Why did Israel sponsor Hamas ????

[irosie91]

a central component of Jewish denial is to mock the facts that accompany the Jews...as Rosie makes abundantly clear....naaaahhhhhh no such thing as conspiracies in the America of the 21st century...LOL

wrong again I never denied the fact that islamo nazi pigs engage in conspiracies I do deny most of the libels that the islamo nazi pigs elaborate I grew up in an islamo nazi town-----completely LILY WHITE because the islamo nazis elaborated a conspiracy theory related to black americans and RAPE of "WHITE WOMEN" I never believed it but later discovered that much of islamo nazi ideology DEPENDS on conspiracy libels My first visit to a mosque took place about 45 years ago on a GOOD FRIDAY (christian holiday) There I learned a very interesting conspiracy theory The IMAM announced with FIRM AND DEFINITE conviction that the NEW TESTAMENT was written for the PURPOSE OF DESTROYING ISLAM See? yet another OBVIOUS AND TRANSPARENT CONSPIRACY FOR YOUR COLLECTION. I did not believe that one-------but the people present in the mosque NODDED their agreement

 

[Hollie]

Ahh. So it was all a conspiracy.

How novel an idea coming from a rabid conspiracy theorist.

good grief, you impoverished fool----we live in age of transparent conspiracies....take a look around: the investment banking conspiracy that tanked our economy...the "weapons of mass destruction" nonsense that was used as pretext to invade and occupy Iraq...and the monster of all conspiracies---9/11.....why not just limit your future posts to "Jew-haters" Hollie...that's about as involved as you get....LOL

Oh cool, a 9/11 twoofer.

 

[Sundowner47]

good grief, you impoverished fool----we live in age of transparent conspiracies....take a look around: the investment banking conspiracy that tanked our economy...the "weapons of mass destruction" nonsense that was used as pretext to invade and occupy Iraq...and the monster of all conspiracies---9/11.....why not just limit your future posts to "Jew-haters" Hollie...that's about as involved as you get....LOL

Oh cool, a 9/11 twoofer.

You should really endeavor to keep up with events: at this sage of the game the official fairy tale peddled by the Bush administration has been completely undermined by the forensic evidence, and something on the order of 2000 architects ans structural engineers who demand an independent investigation...charging that the NIST account is pure "cover-up"....in a recent poll 16% of the U.S. public bought the official tale

 

[Hollie]

Oh cool, a 9/11 twoofer.

You should really endeavor to keep up with events: at this sage of the game the official fairy tale peddled by the Bush administration has been completely undermined by the forensic evidence, and something on the order of 2000 architects ans structural engineers who demand an independent investigation...charging that the NIST account is pure "cover-up"....in a recent poll 16% of the U.S. public bought the official tale

Pretend my earlier comment was never posted.

 

[Hossfly]

Oh cool, a 9/11 twoofer.

You should really endeavor to keep up with events: at this sage of the game the official fairy tale peddled by the Bush administration has been completely undermined by the forensic evidence, and something on the order of 2000 architects ans structural engineers who demand an independent investigation...charging that the NIST account is pure "cover-up"....in a recent poll 16% of the U.S. public bought the official tale

Any of those technical experts been 3 floors above 8000 gallons of burning jet fuel? Any of those experts say that this type of fire won't melt steel? How do those experts explain the manufacture of those steel beams that can't be melted by heat?

 

[irosie91]

You should really endeavor to keep up with events: at this sage of the game the official fairy tale peddled by the Bush administration has been completely undermined by the forensic evidence, and something on the order of 2000 architects ans structural engineers who demand an independent investigation...charging that the NIST account is pure "cover-up"....in a recent poll 16% of the U.S. public bought the official tale

Any of those technical experts been 3 floors above 8000 gallons of burning jet fuel? Any of those experts say that this type of fire won't melt steel? How do those experts explain the manufacture of those steel beams that can't be melted by heat?

Unmeltable steel is simply a libel on the order of matzoh with blood it is very easy to sell to a susceptable idiot

 

[Sundowner47]

convenient that you reference "susceptable idiot"....this is the profile of the 9/11 official story loyalists...confronted with inarguable evidence they manage to transcend the dictates of their own brains...any recognition here ratsy????

 

[Billo_Really]

Sun downer and loinbaby are like rabid dogs who complain WHY DID THEY LET ME HAVE TEETH?

And that makes you THE BITCH!

 

[Billo_Really]

....its far more than "conjecture" at this stage...review Israel's routine referencing of Hamas as the sole reason for a breakdown in negotiations....an honest person would ask why Israel then sponsored Hamas...this ain't rocket science, the pattern is clear and unambiguous...

...and I fail to see how this is either complex or elusive...the equation is as simple as simple gets

No it's not. Why can't you just come out and say what your point is? Why do I have to be Sherlock Holmes just to figure out what you're saying?

I'll make it easy on you, just pick one or the other:

Possible point A:
You agree Israel funded Hamas to deliberately keep negotiations on perpetual hold.

Possible point B:
You disagree Israel funded Hamas, because an honest person would ask "why would they fund an organization they're having so much trouble with."

If it's not one of those, you're just going to have to explain it yourself.

My point is, I posted the proof to backup what I said and if nothing else, it showed I was in the ballpark. Which means, your "not even close" comment, is just a baseless accusation. I have to stop there, because I still don't know what your point is.

 

[Sundowner47]

You should really endeavor to keep up with events: at this sage of the game the official fairy tale peddled by the Bush administration has been completely undermined by the forensic evidence, and something on the order of 2000 architects ans structural engineers who demand an independent investigation...charging that the NIST account is pure "cover-up"....in a recent poll 16% of the U.S. public bought the official tale

Any of those technical experts been 3 floors above 8000 gallons of burning jet fuel? Any of those experts say that this type of fire won't melt steel? How do those experts explain the manufacture of those steel beams that can't be melted by heat?

again dude, you education is sorely lacking here...it is unprecedented for a steel building to collapse from fire...its never happened... buildings have burned for days, but did not collapse...and certainly not in a textbook controlled-demolition manner...think stupid!!!

 

[irosie91]

Israel gave some funding to Hamas at a time that that organization masqueraded as a SOCIAL HELP group The idea was that the more social help palestinians got----the happier and less likely to tie bombs to the stinking asses of their sluts they would be ie---Israel funded Hamas for the same reason they provided running water to Gaza in 1967. In fact The USA funded the tabliban pigs because the US had no idea what DISGUSTING PIGS they were almost the same thing Time for civilized people to learn the truth about "friendly" islamic organizations

 

[Sundowner47]

....its far more than "conjecture" at this stage...review Israel's routine referencing of Hamas as the sole reason for a breakdown in negotiations....an honest person would ask why Israel then sponsored Hamas...this ain't rocket science, the pattern is clear and unambiguous...

...and I fail to see how this is either complex or elusive...the equation is as simple as simple gets

No it's not. Why can't you just come out and say what your point is? Why do I have to be Sherlock Holmes just to figure out what you're saying?

I'll make it easy on you, just pick one or the other:

Possible point A:
You agree Israel funded Hamas to deliberately keep negotiations on perpetual hold.

Possible point B:
You disagree Israel funded Hamas, because an honest person would ask "why would they fund an organization they're having so much trouble with."

If it's not one of those, you're just going to have to explain it yourself.

My point is, I posted the proof to backup what I said and if nothing else, it showed I was in the ballpark. Which means, your "not even close" comment, is just a baseless accusation. I have to stop there, because I still don't know what your point is.

I cannot imagine why you are having such difficulty with this....the charge that Israel sponsored Hamas as an insurance policy against any threat of negotiations has been advanced by a number of observers, so it is hardly my idea alone.....but even more to the point this theory has proven itself by the very actions of the Israelis...I don't know what to tell you here...the equation is demonstrated, so it is hardly theoretical

 

[irosie91]

....its far more than "conjecture" at this stage...review Israel's routine referencing of Hamas as the sole reason for a breakdown in negotiations....an honest person would ask why Israel then sponsored Hamas...this ain't rocket science, the pattern is clear and unambiguous...

...and I fail to see how this is either complex or elusive...the equation is as simple as simple gets

No it's not. Why can't you just come out and say what your point is? Why do I have to be Sherlock Holmes just to figure out what you're saying?

I'll make it easy on you, just pick one or the other:

Possible point A:
You agree Israel funded Hamas to deliberately keep negotiations on perpetual hold.

Possible point B:
You disagree Israel funded Hamas, because an honest person would ask "why would they fund an organization they're having so much trouble with."

If it's not one of those, you're just going to have to explain it yourself.

My point is, I posted the proof to backup what I said and if nothing else, it showed I was in the ballpark. Which means, your "not even close" comment, is just a baseless accusation. I have to stop there, because I still don't know what your point is.

I cannot imagine why you are having such difficulty with this....the charge that Israel sponsored Hamas as an insurance policy against any threat of negotiations has been advanced by a number of observers, so it is hardly my idea alone.....but even more to the point this theory has proven itself by the very actions of the Israelis...I don't know what to tell you here...the equation is demonstrated, so it is hardly theoretical

I am not surprised that you and yours have come up with that idiotic idea ------why not just claim that the hamas people are barbaric pigs BECAUSE ISRAEL FORCES THEM TO BE BARBARIC PIGS? afterall----those of your ilk have suggested that the taliban pigs are forced by THE USA I am waiting for one of you idiots to blame the death of that ALI HUSSEIN IDIOT on AIPAC

it is clear that you did not make out very well in algebra X = y because I say so -----the jews made me say so

 

[Hossfly]

Any of those technical experts been 3 floors above 8000 gallons of burning jet fuel? Any of those experts say that this type of fire won't melt steel? How do those experts explain the manufacture of those steel beams that can't be melted by heat?

again dude, you education is sorely lacking here...it is unprecedented for a steel building to collapse from fire...its never happened... buildings have burned for days, but did not collapse...and certainly not in a textbook controlled-demolition manner...think stupid!!!

My point is the 8,000 gallons of jet fuel so weakened the integrity of the structure that the weight above the fire was too much for the weakened area to support. I know what I witnessed and no troofer will ever change my mind. You can find pictures on the I-net of Civil War soldiers wrapping steel rails around trees so the enemy couldn't use them. And they didn't build the fires with 8,000 gallons of jet fuel either.

 

[Billo_Really]

I cannot imagine why you are having such difficulty with this....the charge that Israel sponsored Hamas as an insurance policy against any threat of negotiations has been advanced by a number of observers, so it is hardly my idea alone.....but even more to the point this theory has proven itself by the very actions of the Israelis...I don't know what to tell you here...the equation is demonstrated, so it is hardly theoretical

So you chose "A"?

 

[Billo_Really]

I am not surprised that you and yours have come up with that idiotic idea ------why not just claim that the hamas people are barbaric pigs BECAUSE ISRAEL FORCES THEM TO BE BARBARIC PIGS? afterall----those of your ilk have suggested that the taliban pigs are forced by THE USA I am waiting for one of you idiots to blame the death of that ALI HUSSEIN IDIOT on AIPAC

it is clear that you did not make out very well in algebra X = y because I say so -----the jews made me say so

Tell me, how do you say no to butt stuff?

 

[SAYIT]

....its far more than "conjecture" at this stage...review Israel's routine referencing of Hamas as the sole reason for a breakdown in negotiations....an honest person would ask why Israel then sponsored Hamas...this ain't rocket science, the pattern is clear and unambiguous...

...and I fail to see how this is either complex or elusive...the equation is as simple as simple gets

No it's not. Why can't you just come out and say what your point is? Why do I have to be Sherlock Holmes just to figure out what you're saying?

I'll make it easy on you, just pick one or the other:

Possible point A:
You agree Israel funded Hamas to deliberately keep negotiations on perpetual hold.

Possible point B:
You disagree Israel funded Hamas, because an honest person would ask "why would they fund an organization they're having so much trouble with."

If it's not one of those, you're just going to have to explain it yourself.

My point is, I posted the proof to backup what I said and if nothing else, it showed I was in the ballpark. Which means, your "not even close" comment, is just a baseless accusation. I have to stop there, because I still don't know what your point is.

I cannot imagine why you are having such difficulty with this....the charge that Israel sponsored Hamas as an insurance policy against any threat of negotiations has been advanced by a number of observers, so it is hardly my idea alone.....but even more to the point this theory has proven itself by the very actions of the Israelis...I don't know what to tell you here...the equation is demonstrated, so it is hardly theoretical

Get that goat cock outta your mouth, Princess.

 

[SAYIT]

I cannot imagine why you are having such difficulty with this....the charge that Israel sponsored Hamas as an insurance policy against any threat of negotiations has been advanced by a number of observers, so it is hardly my idea alone.....but even more to the point this theory has proven itself by the very actions of the Israelis...I don't know what to tell you here...the equation is demonstrated, so it is hardly theoretical

So you chose "A"?

So you're saying that you understand that Skit is a flaming loon who has lost his ability - assuming he ever had it - to discern fact from fiction?