Gaza ***GRAPHIC PICS***

1…4546485051…67

Comments

  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
  • mickeyrat
    mickeyrat Posts: 44,531
    edited August 2014
    Now, if only every State would look at the totality of actions taken and see what truely has been allowed to happen.

    AND its about time Britain started to make right the failings of the 40's and much earlier under colonial rule.

    NOW, if we can only shift the mindset of the pussy politicians here. There needs to be a limit in the support we offer ANY nation. And look more to justice in itself. THAT to me speaks to stated values and may provide credible standing that we think we have now.
    Post edited by mickeyrat on
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • JC29856
    JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    edited August 2014
    Referring to pjsoul...

    im not sure your 6 points are in the article but anyway...
    1) i can't get past your #1..weapon against who? What goal? To kill innocent Palestinians? So your saying they are working with Israel? Wow i must admit i never thought of that...i guess there's no need to address the remaining 5
  • JimmyV
    JimmyV Boston's MetroWest Posts: 19,600
    JC29856 said:

    Referring to pjsoul...

    im not sure your 6 points are in the article but anyway...
    1) i can't get past your #1..weapon against who? What goal? To kill innocent Palestinians? So your saying they are working with Israel? Wow i must admit i never thought of that...i guess there's no need to address the remaining 5

    I think she means weapon in a public relations war.

    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
  • JC29856
    JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    Pjsoul
    I just seen your edit.... Im not saying some pics are not authentic, I'm saying that the pics that the article refers to may come from retweets Twitter, my pics at least come from "journalist".
    Sometimes you can sift thru bs by just seeing who had the power and control (us and Israel). Fortunately at least for now they can,t completely control the internet, but they are working hard to do so.
    In any case for someone to claim "mainly from Syria" means they had to have seen virtually all pics from gaza. My question would be how many pics are you referring to when you say "mainly", 10 100 1,000 10,000. The writer seen all pics coming from gaza, outlandish, kinda like the rest of his garbage.
  • JC29856
    JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    badbrains said:

    Hogwash...their actors getting paid handsomely!
  • JC29856
    JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    edited August 2014
    I think i seen the dead terrorist toddler girl blink...can't fool me
    Post edited by JC29856 on
  • JimmyV
    JimmyV Boston's MetroWest Posts: 19,600
    Do we know which attack that picture is from?
    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,694
    edited August 2014
    dignin said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    JC29856 said:

    pjsoul
    what parts make alot of sense? what points are good? i wouldn't mind giving my side...

    The parts that strike me the most and that I believe to be true are (and please try not to read between any lines here - there is nothing there. The article is pretty pro-Israeli, ironically, so many of these points are more about what Hamas is doing. That doesn't mean that there aren't a lot of similarly damning points against Israel, but only that this article doesn't properly address them IMO, which is why they're not listed. I do NOT favour the Israeli government over Hamas or vice-versa. I am not on the fence. I think that both sides are doing absolutely everything wrong):
    1) Hamas's greatest weapon is dead Palestinian children.
    2) Both sides are very much motivated by both racism and religion (tribal conflict).
    3) The focused outrage from the Muslim world is fueled by the fact that the perpetrators (as they see it) are Jews and the focused outrage from Jews is fueled by the fact that the perpetrators (as they see it) are Muslim (this is just more of the race-driven concept).
    4) Children on both sides are being raised to hate one another.
    5) If Israel wanted to wipe out the Palestinians they would have done it already.
    6) Hamas is doing a piss poor job of even trying to protect Palestinian lives and in fact seems to deliberately put them at risk at times.

    PS - I really can't say for sure whether or not Hamas is using photos from other conflicts as propaganda, but I would definitely not put it past them, and the chances that civilians and just anti-Israelis are doing the same is almost 100% likely. That doesn't discount what is actually happening, which is horrific, but this conflict is one that is huge on propaganda without shame on both sides, so the idea that Hamas or anyone might be using photos of dead children from other places seems like an incredibly likely suggestion.
    Doesn't change the fact that over 300 children have been murdered and many more injured. Pictures or not they are still being murdered. I don't see how it really matters if the pictures we are seeing are of those particular dead children.

    No, of course it doesn't change or excuse the fact that 300 children have been slaughtered. But I wholeheartedly disagree that it doesn't matter if Hamas or anybody is using photos of massacres that have nothing to do with this conflict and claiming that they are photos from Gaza in order to create outrage, anti-semitism, or to convince people that the context is factual. The TRUTH always matters.
    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
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    So the pictures I'm posting are fake? Interesting.....
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,694
    JimmyV said:

    JC29856 said:

    Referring to pjsoul...

    im not sure your 6 points are in the article but anyway...
    1) i can't get past your #1..weapon against who? What goal? To kill innocent Palestinians? So your saying they are working with Israel? Wow i must admit i never thought of that...i guess there's no need to address the remaining 5

    I think she means weapon in a public relations war.

    Exactly, thank you JimmyV.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,694
    edited August 2014
    JC29856 said:

    badbrains said:

    Hogwash...their actors getting paid handsomely!
    :-/ I don't doubt that these are real dead children. X_X
    Are they dead children in Gaza after an Israeli attack? Who knows. There are plenty of children being slaughtered by a few different aggressors in the world right now. The world is actually just focused on one of those conflicts, and that conflict happens to be where the least number of children are being killed compared to the others, like Syria, Nigeria, etc. But since the US and allies are more heavily involved, that's the one that's getting the most attention..... Not that it doesn't deserve all the attention. The other conflicts deserve more, but unless Western powers get as involved as they are with Israel, that attention won't be forthcoming. But i guess that's a separate topic.
    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
  • callen
    callen Posts: 6,388
    Both sides suck. They both kill innocents for power and control. Fucking Palestinians sacrifice women and children. Shoot rockets indiscriminately at civilians. And Israelis will continue to build settlements. All while US and foreign corporations make a killing on weapons sakes and we the taxpayer foot the fucking bill. Both sides suck or human sheep behavior sucks. Oh well world overpopulated so good thing in end I guess.
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,694
    JC29856 said:

    Pjsoul
    I just seen your edit.... Im not saying some pics are not authentic, I'm saying that the pics that the article refers to may come from retweets Twitter, my pics at least come from "journalist".
    Sometimes you can sift thru bs by just seeing who had the power and control (us and Israel). Fortunately at least for now they can,t completely control the internet, but they are working hard to do so.
    In any case for someone to claim "mainly from Syria" means they had to have seen virtually all pics from gaza. My question would be how many pics are you referring to when you say "mainly", 10 100 1,000 10,000. The writer seen all pics coming from gaza, outlandish, kinda like the rest of his garbage.

    I never said "mainly from Syria".
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • bootlegger10
    bootlegger10 Posts: 16,258
    edited August 2014
    JC29856 said:

    Referring to pjsoul...

    im not sure your 6 points are in the article but anyway...
    1) i can't get past your #1..weapon against who? What goal? To kill innocent Palestinians? So your saying they are working with Israel? Wow i must admit i never thought of that...i guess there's no need to address the remaining 5

    Obviously she meant #1 to be the war of public opinion. Every dead picture of a Palestinian child sways public opinion further to the Palestinians. SInce the rocket fire does little damage to Israel, there really is no reason to fire them other than to create a retaliation from Israel. Who gets retaliated on? Palestinian civilians. Hence, Hamas fires rockets to force Israel to respond and kill more innocent Palestinians.
    Post edited by bootlegger10 on
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,694
    bootlegger10 said:

    JC29856 said:

    Referring to pjsoul...

    im not sure your 6 points are in the article but anyway...
    1) i can't get past your #1..weapon against who? What goal? To kill innocent Palestinians? So your saying they are working with Israel? Wow i must admit i never thought of that...i guess there's no need to address the remaining 5

    Obviously she meant #1 to be the war of public opinion. Every dead picture of a Palestinian child sways public opinion further to the Palestinians. SInce the rocket fire does little damage to Israel, there really is no reason to fire them other than to create a retaliation from Israel. Who gets retaliated on? Palestinian civilians. Hence, Hamas fires rockets to force Israel to respond and kill more innocent Palestinians.
    Yep.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • JimmyV
    JimmyV Boston's MetroWest Posts: 19,600
    PJ_Soul said:

    JimmyV said:

    JC29856 said:

    Referring to pjsoul...

    im not sure your 6 points are in the article but anyway...
    1) i can't get past your #1..weapon against who? What goal? To kill innocent Palestinians? So your saying they are working with Israel? Wow i must admit i never thought of that...i guess there's no need to address the remaining 5

    I think she means weapon in a public relations war.

    Exactly, thank you JimmyV.
    I thought it was pretty clear.

    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,694
    badbrains said:

    That's great. I said somewhere recently that I can't see how the US could possibly keep this up... with developments like this, I have some small amount of hope for some kind of turnaround for the US.... if not now, at least it might become a major election campaign issue. It's going to get harder and harder for new presidential candidates to run with a pro-Israeli platform at this rate
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • JC29856
    JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    a few things...
    hamas #1 weapon is dead kids civilians in a public relations war? i need even further explanation on that? i did ask weapons against who? and what are their goals/objectives? still unanswered. any explanation is circular nonsense. they want the world to condemn israel? for what purpose (maybe to stop bombing civilians/children). they want the world to bomb israel? they want the guy in bumblefuck usa and bumblefuck england to feel sorry for Palestinians? for what, how does that obtain their alleged objective to kill all jews? please explain, i cannot wait.
    next... you dont believe the pictures are from palestine? does it change the fact that hundreds are dead? you want names ages weight and height? so okay say 3 of 10 pictures of dead kids arent from palestine...how why does this matter?
    next... im not really sure how to calculate the world coverage of dead civilians, althou i think is interesting that israel is pointing to isis and other groups to make it seen like killing only 2000 civilians is better than 180,000 in syria. what matter most to me is that the USofA is directly responsible for palestinian deaths than say syrian.im sorry that maybe because of dead kid pictures the world is finally taking notice but i understand it is a bit inconvenient.
    next... you mentioned the article, "mainly" was from the article which is what i thought we were discussing....where did i veer off?

This discussion has been closed.

Categories