It was. While the Israeli soldiers were seeking out to destroy the terror tunnels, a suicide bomber killed 2 soldiers and possibly the same or separate incident another soldier was taken hostage minutes after the cease fire.
John Kerry (and others) are calling for the unconditional return of the soldier captured to effectively break the terms of the cease fire.
But, don't worry - that will be dismissed a propaganda because it doesn't fit with a certain world view.
The 'terror tunnels'? I see you've bought into the Fox News, Benjamin Netanyahu narrative. The 'terror tunnels'. Really? Is that what you think they are? Those tunnels that are an essential lifeline for a people under seige, and which supply approx 65% of their essential needs. If there was no blockade then threre'd be no tunnels.
It was. While the Israeli soldiers were seeking out to destroy the terror tunnels, a suicide bomber killed 2 soldiers and possibly the same or separate incident another soldier was taken hostage minutes after the cease fire.
John Kerry (and others) are calling for the unconditional return of the soldier captured to effectively break the terms of the cease fire.
But, don't worry - that will be dismissed a propaganda because it doesn't fit with a certain world view.
The 'terror tunnels'? I see you've bought into the Fox News, Benjamin Netanyahu narrative. The 'terror tunnels'. Really? Is that what you think they are? Those tunnels that are an essential lifeline for a people under seige, and which supply approx 65% of their essential needs. If there was no blockade then threre'd be no tunnels.
Just to be clear, and I fully expect a litany of links refuting what I say, but the tunnels into Israel were not made to smuggle supplies. Those tunnels had very different goals. The tunnels into Egypt were built to smuggle in and resupply the essential needs of the residents of Gaza.
In German we say the sound makes the music. What I notice in here is that there is no real discussion because everytime somebody says something that is not supported by a portion of the posters, they get shut down by belittling comments. I see the motivation, I see the anger, I am angry too about this whole thing. But in my opinion it won't help the cause at all if people communicate like this. Somebody said earlier all the pro-Israel people went away from the thread. That is probably true, but can you blame them? This in here is a very one-sided discussion. This is not how to debate properly. If you want to have a mature discussion, you don't shove your own opinion which you think is superior to everybody else's down other people's throats. You are all smart adults.
Peace.
Please, Pearl Jam, consider a Benaroya Hall vinyl reissue!
http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2014/aug/01/gaza-crisis-israel-palestinians-ceasefire-begins-live-updates The persistently high civilian death toll in Gaza has raised questions among military analysts and humanitarian law experts over the quality of training of Israeli gunners and their rules of engagement in such heavily populated areas, writes Julian Borger, the Guardian’s diplomatic editor. He quotes Amnesty International’s Donatella Rovera.
“Reckless targeting is a recurring problem, and the hand-wringing and words of regret no longer have any value. If you are making the same mistakes again and again, you would hope something is being learned,” she said, adding there was no sign of any disciplinary action for IDF mistakes that kill civilians. “There is no pattern of anyone being held to account, and impunity just leads to more reckless behaviour.”
People like Byrnzie don't even read anything pertaining to peace. We're just all ready to react.
I'm done.
No, of course I don't, which is why for the past 20 or so years I've been calling for Israel to be made to comply with international law, and for the peaceful settlement that's accepted by the whole World and vetoed by the U.S, to be implemented.
Some peaceful protesters in the late '60s became so hard headed and angry about the war, they started making their own war: making bombs in their basements to combat pro-war folks. Really? Using violence to combat violence? That is exactly what that post about being "anti-war" by being against war yet pro anger, and inevitably pro-war. You CAN'T SOLVE VIOLENCE WITH VIOLENCE.
Wake up folks, the only way to combat war is through empathy, understanding, dropping the pride, ego and issues we have in order to save mankind. Learn from each other, solve our issues and what Eddie said: "LOVE, LOVE, LOVE."
How many bombs were exploded during the anti-Vietnam protests of the 60's? None. Seriously, do you just make this stuff up because it sounds good?
The Vietnam war was not brought to an end by hippies sitting around hugging each other and talking about love. The Vietnam was war largely brought to an end by massive protests, some of which turned violent - like Kent State, where the National Guard shot and killed two student protestors.
if someone says something you truly believe is wrong do you call them a liar or do you say, "I'm sorry but I believe you are greatly mistaken"? A person can be greatly mistaken yet not be lying. So instead of taking the more aggressive approach and discussing we get here, time and again, personal attacks.
Or maybe if people just stuck to the facts instead of posting their own personal beliefs and opinions, and Fox News and IDF talking points, then we wouldn't have a problem in the first place.
The problem as I see it isn't that there's any hate here, as some of you like to keep mentioning, but that there's too much bullshit. Stick to the facts, and then we can have an honest discussion about the reality of the situation. If people quit posting bullshit then we can avoid having to counter their bullshit and run the risk of them being offended. The facts are not difficult to come by. We all have computers, so what's the excuse? And before someone wants to get smart and point out that I posted some info which claimed that Israeli tanks broke the ceasefire, that was actually the news which was coming out approx two-three hours before the reports of the kidnapping of the IDF soldier.
Hamas has a VERY bad track record as far as violating cease-fires go.
Did you just say that because it sounded good?
So if someone says that ALL of these numbers should be 0, then there is in some way something wrong with that person? Or that opinion? Just trying to figure out how real human beings are missing the point by such a large margin here…
Just to be clear, and I fully expect a litany of links refuting what I say, but the tunnels into Israel were not made to smuggle supplies. Those tunnels had very different goals. The tunnels into Egypt were built to smuggle in and resupply the essential needs of the residents of Gaza.
That doesn't stop the media referring to all of the tunnels as 'terror tunnels' though, does it?
Also, how many terrorist attacks have actually taken place from these tunnels? The Hamas/Al Qassam fighters only target the IDF, which they are entitled to do. That's not terrorism. Terrorism is deliberately targeting civilians, as the Israeli's have been doing for the past two weeks.
So if someone says that ALL of these numbers should be 0, then there is in some way something wrong with that person? Or that opinion? Just trying to figure out how real human beings are missing the point by such a large margin here…
I didn't see anybody claiming that all of these numbers should be zero. I saw somebody say that "Hamas has a VERY bad track record as far as violating cease-fires go."
Somebody said earlier all the pro-Israel people went away from the thread. That is probably true, but can you blame them? This in here is a very one-sided discussion. This is not how to debate properly. If you want to have a mature discussion, you don't shove your own opinion which you think is superior to everybody else's down other people's throats. You are all smart adults.
Again, with the 'opinions'. The problem has always been that those who like to post 'opinions' and 'beliefs' don't like it when the other person posts facts based on the documentary record. That's why they disappear.
Some peaceful protesters in the late '60s became so hard headed and angry about the war, they started making their own war: making bombs in their basements to combat pro-war folks. Really? Using violence to combat violence? That is exactly what that post about being "anti-war" by being against war yet pro anger, and inevitably pro-war. You CAN'T SOLVE VIOLENCE WITH VIOLENCE.
Wake up folks, the only way to combat war is through empathy, understanding, dropping the pride, ego and issues we have in order to save mankind. Learn from each other, solve our issues and what Eddie said: "LOVE, LOVE, LOVE."
How many bombs were exploded during the anti-Vietnam protests of the 60's? None. Seriously, do you just make this stuff up because it sounds good?
The Vietnam war was not brought to an end by hippies sitting around hugging each other and talking about love. The Vietnam was war largely brought to an end by massive protests, some of which turned violent - like Kent State, where the National Guard shot and killed two student protestors.
Not to argue but just to clarify, Byrnzie, from my experience. I was there.
You are correct about those protests. I was on campus at San Francisco State University during some of the protests against the Vietnam war. What I saw were people fed up with an unjust war- angry people. I saw tac squad moving into position on campus- large men dressed in dark fatigues mounted on large black horses with shields and black clubs, mace and guns. I saw young people beaten and bleeding. I had friends and a family member who were involved in similar protest across the bay at U.C. Berkeley, another bastion of peace and love hippie hugging freaks.
But to deny that the pacifists did not play a vital role as well is very unfair to those of us who protested by promoting peace, by writing letters, by attending some of those protest at great risk to ourselves (I saw friends, fellow pacifists bleed) and, yes, by making love, not war. You make light of pacifism by snide remarks, implying that all we did was sit around and hug and talk about love. Oh, that we did! You bet! And, yes, some took the easy way out and simply spaced out but the peace and love movement was not only confined to the paisley and polka dot posters you see in all those nostalgia books. There were many of us who were ardent, serious, mindful, thoughtful pacifists and we did not make our point by going around berating others and pompously declaring what they had to say was bullshit. Generalizing a group you don't support with cliches and biased statements may not be the best way to make your point, B. No,hatred, huh?
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
But how do you know your facts are facts and not propaganda? How can anybody be sure that what they read on the almighty internet is real? I am all for facts. What I do not like is feeling belittled or mocked when I am still out there to form my opinion or to learn about facts. If you want to pull somebody over to your side because you think you have the facts, then do not treat them like they just talked shit. Be the wise man and bring your message out like it. Who will listen to you if you shoo everybody away?
Please, Pearl Jam, consider a Benaroya Hall vinyl reissue!
But how do you know your facts are facts and not propaganda? How can anybody be sure that what they read on the almighty internet is real? I am all for facts. What I do not like is feeling belittled or mocked when I am still out there to form my opinion or to learn about facts. If you want to pull somebody over to your side because you think you have the facts, then do not treat them like they just talked shit. Be the wise man and bring your message out like it. Who will listen to you if you shoo everybody away?
I support this message.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
So if someone says that ALL of these numbers should be 0, then there is in some way something wrong with that person? Or that opinion? Just trying to figure out how real human beings are missing the point by such a large margin here…
I didn't see anybody claiming that all of these numbers should be zero. I saw somebody say that "Hamas has a VERY bad track record as far as violating cease-fires go."
Byrnzie, My point is that an artist who just doesn't want any more people to die and is frustrated wrote a letter explaining that. Now the thread that follows has turned into this argument about who is "right" or "wrong" and is using human casualties as numeric proof. You seem like a very passionate person, and pretty bright as well. Doesn't it seem like this thread has turned into a microcosm of the initial statements point? No more war, of any kind, for any reason...
But how do you know your facts are facts and not propaganda? How can anybody be sure that what they read on the almighty internet is real?
What makes you think that everything I post comes from the internet? Secondly, you're assuming that nothing can be believed as fact. That there's no such thing as the documentary record.
fact [fakt]
noun 1. something that actually exists; reality; truth: Your fears have no basis in fact. 2. something known to exist or to have happened: Space travel is now a fact. 3. a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true: Scientists gather facts about plant growth. 4. something said to be true or supposed to have happened: The facts given by the witness are highly questionable.
...Obama also insisted that the deaths of "innocent civilians in Gaza caught in the crossfire have to weigh on our conscience and we have to do more to protect them."
So let me get this right; attacking and killing soldiers is 'barbaric', while deliberately attacking and killing civilians 'weighs on our conscience'.
She never said that everything you post is from the Internet, nor that everything g you post is propaganda. But maybe you should stop treating everyone who doesn't consider you the utmost authority on the matter, as well as the moral dictator in the matter, like they're idiots or assholes. I can't speak for Leeze, but that's how you're coming off IMO. Doesn't mean that i don't agree with SOME of what you have said. But i think that you are alienating most people, and that has nothing to do with what your opinion is or how much you supposedly know compared to every single other person here. It has to do with presentation and your apparent lack of respect for others. If you disagree with that, then you sincerely don't give a shit about what anyone thinks, in which case I don't understand why you're even bothering to post at all.
Little edit: yes, I know you stopped caring about anything I said a long time ago, lol. I'm saying it anyway.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Maybe we perceive the meaning of fact in a different way. From the Oxford dictionary, I get this: 1 A thing that is known or proved to be true: the most commonly known fact about hedgehogs is that they have fleas [mass noun]: a body of fact
(1.1 (facts) Information used as evidence or as part of a report or news article: even the most inventive journalism peters out without facts, and in this case there were no facts 1.2 (the fact that) Used to refer to a particular situation under discussion: despite the fact that I’m so tired, sleep is elusive)
1.3 The truth about events as opposed to interpretation: there was a question of fact as to whether they had received the letter
1.1 and 1.2 do not fit into what my understanding of facts is in this whole scenario. But 1 and 1.3 hit the nail on the head. My understanding of "facts" in regards to news about a conflict like this one we talk about here does not include your points 3 and 4. How can something that has been said to have happened or is supposed to have happened actually be a fact? A fact is a fact. In fact, you can never actually believe anything is a fact if you haven't been there and haven't documented it from all angles. So I am suspicious of everything that is reported at conflicts like this. There is no news agency in this world who has a truly objective perspective on this conflict. So we have to read between the lines. I guess.
Please, Pearl Jam, consider a Benaroya Hall vinyl reissue!
She never said that everything you post is from the Internet, nor that everything g you post is propaganda. But maybe you should stop treating everyone who doesn't consider you the utmost authority on the matter, as well as the moral dictator in the matter, like they're idiots or assholes. I can't speak for Leeze, but that's how you're coming off IMO. Doesn't mean that i don't agree with SOME of what you have said. But i think that you are alienating most people, and that has nothing to do with what your opinion is or how much you supposedly know compared to every single other person here. It has to do with presentation and your apparent lack of respect for others. If you disagree with that, then you sincerely don't give a shit about what anyone thinks, in which case I don't understand why you're even bothering to post at all.
Little edit: yes, I know you stopped caring about anything I said a long time ago, lol. I'm saying it anyway.
This thread's like a fucking roller coaster from day to evening.
PJ Soul and Leeze, for whatever it's worth, respect from here for your well-spokenness and candor up there.
(I had a mini-epiphany earlier when walking down the hallway this evening, seeing mezuzas on almost every doorway, including ours. Hope I can write about it in some way to do it justice, as another viewpoint amongst the many.)
In fact, you can never actually believe anything is a fact if you haven't been there and haven't documented it from all angles. So I am suspicious of everything that is reported at conflicts like this. There is no news agency in this world who has a truly objective perspective on this conflict. So we have to read between the lines. I guess.
That's right, but you seem to be assuming that the only available information is that which comes from news agencies.
Facts can be gleaned from many sources: human rights organization reports, such as Amnesty International, the United Nations, recorded speeches, political statements, the documents pertaining to international law, e.t.c.
She never said that everything you post is from the Internet, nor that everything g you post is propaganda. But maybe you should stop treating everyone who doesn't consider you the utmost authority on the matter, as well as the moral dictator in the matter, like they're idiots or assholes. I can't speak for Leeze, but that's how you're coming off IMO. Doesn't mean that i don't agree with SOME of what you have said. But i think that you are alienating most people, and that has nothing to do with what your opinion is or how much you supposedly know compared to every single other person here. It has to do with presentation and your apparent lack of respect for others. If you disagree with that, then you sincerely don't give a shit about what anyone thinks, in which case I don't understand why you're even bothering to post at all.
Little edit: yes, I know you stopped caring about anything I said a long time ago, lol. I'm saying it anyway.
You forgot to accuse me of being a racist.
Well, i still can't accept that "understandable" thing, but others already stated my argument on that one.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Wait...is reading/posting a link not getting something from the internet, regardless of whether or not it's a (legit) news agency?
Yeah, why?
Earlier you'd said "what makes you think that everything I post comes from the internet?", but it does, as do the other sources of information you mentioned after.
The majority of our information is obtained "from the internet" or some form of broadcasting. Just not seeing the unquestioned accuracy of yours vs questioning those of others.
Not to mention opinions - some of this IS based on that. How can the fervor with which we hold them not be reflected? It's part of this whole discussion.
Comments
The 'terror tunnels'. Really? Is that what you think they are? Those tunnels that are an essential lifeline for a people under seige, and which supply approx 65% of their essential needs. If there was no blockade then threre'd be no tunnels.
The tunnels into Egypt were built to smuggle in and resupply the essential needs of the residents of Gaza.
Peace.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2014/aug/01/gaza-crisis-israel-palestinians-ceasefire-begins-live-updates
The persistently high civilian death toll in Gaza has raised questions among military analysts and humanitarian law experts over the quality of training of Israeli gunners and their rules of engagement in such heavily populated areas, writes Julian Borger, the Guardian’s diplomatic editor. He quotes Amnesty International’s Donatella Rovera.
“Reckless targeting is a recurring problem, and the hand-wringing and words of regret no longer have any value. If you are making the same mistakes again and again, you would hope something is being learned,” she said, adding there was no sign of any disciplinary action for IDF mistakes that kill civilians. “There is no pattern of anyone being held to account, and impunity just leads to more reckless behaviour.”
The Vietnam war was not brought to an end by hippies sitting around hugging each other and talking about love. The Vietnam was war largely brought to an end by massive protests, some of which turned violent - like Kent State, where the National Guard shot and killed two student protestors.
The problem as I see it isn't that there's any hate here, as some of you like to keep mentioning, but that there's too much bullshit.
Stick to the facts, and then we can have an honest discussion about the reality of the situation. If people quit posting bullshit then we can avoid having to counter their bullshit and run the risk of them being offended. The facts are not difficult to come by. We all have computers, so what's the excuse?
And before someone wants to get smart and point out that I posted some info which claimed that Israeli tanks broke the ceasefire, that was actually the news which was coming out approx two-three hours before the reports of the kidnapping of the IDF soldier.
in some way something wrong with that person? Or that opinion?
Just trying to figure out how real human beings are missing the point
by such a large margin here…
Also, how many terrorist attacks have actually taken place from these tunnels? The Hamas/Al Qassam fighters only target the IDF, which they are entitled to do. That's not terrorism. Terrorism is deliberately targeting civilians, as the Israeli's have been doing for the past two weeks.
That's why they disappear.
You are correct about those protests. I was on campus at San Francisco State University during some of the protests against the Vietnam war. What I saw were people fed up with an unjust war- angry people. I saw tac squad moving into position on campus- large men dressed in dark fatigues mounted on large black horses with shields and black clubs, mace and guns. I saw young people beaten and bleeding. I had friends and a family member who were involved in similar protest across the bay at U.C. Berkeley, another bastion of peace and love hippie hugging freaks.
But to deny that the pacifists did not play a vital role as well is very unfair to those of us who protested by promoting peace, by writing letters, by attending some of those protest at great risk to ourselves (I saw friends, fellow pacifists bleed) and, yes, by making love, not war. You make light of pacifism by snide remarks, implying that all we did was sit around and hug and talk about love. Oh, that we did! You bet! And, yes, some took the easy way out and simply spaced out but the peace and love movement was not only confined to the paisley and polka dot posters you see in all those nostalgia books. There were many of us who were ardent, serious, mindful, thoughtful pacifists and we did not make our point by going around berating others and pompously declaring what they had to say was bullshit. Generalizing a group you don't support with cliches and biased statements may not be the best way to make your point, B.
No,hatred, huh?
My point is that an artist who just doesn't want any more people to die and is frustrated
wrote a letter explaining that. Now the thread that follows has turned into this argument
about who is "right" or "wrong" and is using human casualties as numeric proof.
You seem like a very passionate person, and pretty bright as well.
Doesn't it seem like this thread has turned into a microcosm of the initial statements
point? No more war, of any kind, for any reason...
Secondly, you're assuming that nothing can be believed as fact. That there's no such thing as the documentary record.
fact
[fakt]
noun
1.
something that actually exists; reality; truth:
Your fears have no basis in fact.
2.
something known to exist or to have happened:
Space travel is now a fact.
3.
a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true:
Scientists gather facts about plant growth.
4.
something said to be true or supposed to have happened:
The facts given by the witness are highly questionable.
'The United States placed the blame for the swift collapse of the latest Gaza ceasefire squarely at the door of Hamas on Friday, accusing the Palestinian militants of launching a "barbaric" attack.
...Obama also insisted that the deaths of "innocent civilians in Gaza caught in the crossfire have to weigh on our conscience and we have to do more to protect them."
So let me get this right; attacking and killing soldiers is 'barbaric', while deliberately attacking and killing civilians 'weighs on our conscience'.
'Hamas for its part accused Israel of breaching the ceasefire after intensive shelling killed dozens of people in southern Gaza.'
She never said that everything you post is from the Internet, nor that everything g you post is propaganda.
But maybe you should stop treating everyone who doesn't consider you the utmost authority on the matter, as well as the moral dictator in the matter, like they're idiots or assholes. I can't speak for Leeze, but that's how you're coming off IMO. Doesn't mean that i don't agree with SOME of what you have said. But i think that you are alienating most people, and that has nothing to do with what your opinion is or how much you supposedly know compared to every single other person here. It has to do with presentation and your apparent lack of respect for others. If you disagree with that, then you sincerely don't give a shit about what anyone thinks, in which case I don't understand why you're even bothering to post at all.
Little edit: yes, I know you stopped caring about anything I said a long time ago, lol. I'm saying it anyway.
1 A thing that is known or proved to be true: the most commonly known fact about hedgehogs is that they have fleas [mass noun]: a body of fact
(1.1 (facts) Information used as evidence or as part of a report or news article: even the most inventive journalism peters out without facts, and in this case there were no facts
1.2 (the fact that) Used to refer to a particular situation under discussion: despite the fact that I’m so tired, sleep is elusive)
1.3 The truth about events as opposed to interpretation: there was a question of fact as to whether they had received the letter
1.1 and 1.2 do not fit into what my understanding of facts is in this whole scenario. But 1 and 1.3 hit the nail on the head. My understanding of "facts" in regards to news about a conflict like this one we talk about here does not include your points 3 and 4. How can something that has been said to have happened or is supposed to have happened actually be a fact? A fact is a fact. In fact, you can never actually believe anything is a fact if you haven't been there and haven't documented it from all angles. So I am suspicious of everything that is reported at conflicts like this. There is no news agency in this world who has a truly objective perspective on this conflict. So we have to read between the lines. I guess.
PJ Soul and Leeze, for whatever it's worth, respect from here for your well-spokenness and candor up there.
(I had a mini-epiphany earlier when walking down the hallway this evening, seeing mezuzas on almost every doorway, including ours. Hope I can write about it in some way to do it justice, as another viewpoint amongst the many.)
Facts can be gleaned from many sources: human rights organization reports, such as Amnesty International, the United Nations, recorded speeches, political statements, the documents pertaining to international law, e.t.c.
The majority of our information is obtained "from the internet" or some form of broadcasting. Just not seeing the unquestioned accuracy of yours vs questioning those of others.
Not to mention opinions - some of this IS based on that. How can the fervor with which we hold them not be reflected? It's part of this whole discussion.