UN Report: Israel to blame for UN Building attacks

This may a bit off but...

Didn't the UN admit it allowed Palestinian terrorists to enter the UN building and attack Israeli troops from there, using the UN as cover????

I won't take the time to look it up now, but it was posted from several sources.

I know, how dare I ruin people fun by bringing the truth.

Thank God!!!!! I remember when this happened, from what I remember it was a school being used as a hostage shelter run by the UN. I was a member on a different forum at the time, and I simply couldn't believe the lies used as justification for this action. My favorite was that the UN was shooting from within the building and allowing Palastinian male fighters to shoot from the building as well. Silly Evangelicals

I don't think that there will be an actual war crimes trial, or anything else for that matter. But I am glad to see that its out there, I'm all of the accountability, and I hope that something does come of it.

reply to post by searching4truth


Even if you don't like the truth, it is still the truth.

The UN allowed or at the very least, did not stop Palestine terrorists from entering and Using the UN building for shelter as they attacked from the building.

This is no surprise at all.

Everyone knows the Palestinian terrorists hide behind women and children, hiding behind the UN is no stretch at all.

Originally posted by Nammu
There was an excellent interview on Channel 4 news last night where John Snow tore Mark Regev to shreds over this. Unfortunately no one's uploaded it anywhere yet. The interview ended on Regev claiming that they didn't bomb UN facilities

They knew fine well where the UN facilities were. They even got a call while in the middle of shelling one and said they would stop, yet continued to shell it for 2 hours.

They always claim that militants shoot from the buildings without any evidence at all as an excuse for bombing neutrals and innocent civilians.

I'm sorry, but if one of the most advanced armies in the world can't take out a couple of guys with peashooters that are near a facility without blowing the hell out of it and killing loads of innocent people, then the people of the US of A should be pretty p'd off that the 'military aid' coming from their taxes aint being spent very wisely.

I am just uploading the Regev Video now, delusional would be an understatement

reply to post by mrmonsoon



I'm sorry, but I would like to see your sources. I'll search for the ones I had showing the U.N. building at the time, bc I never saw any actual proof that that particular building was used as a cover for "war".

Here are just a few:

www.guardian.co.uk...
www.hrw.org...
In an email to Human Rights Watch, Andrew Whitley, director of the UNRWA Representative Office at the UN, stated: "[T]here has been no recent abuse of our facilities in Gaza by Palestinian militants using them for cover or as firing positions. There were no, repeat no, mortars fired from the school in Jabaliya camp, although we cannot exclude that there was fighting nearby."

www.scoop.co.nz...
"It felt like the building was about to collapse. The attack felt like it would not end. Israel has denied the international media access to Gaza, now they are targeting those who are attempting to tell the world what is happening here. Israel does not want the world to see it's crimes." Eva Bartlett - International Solidarity Movement

Israel has maintained it's ban on foreign journalists entering the Gaza Strip, despite an Israeli Supreme Court ruling stating that they should be permitted.

To me that doesn't sound like fighters with guns so much as "fighters" with pens, computers, cell phones, and a way to get out the true story of what transpired, instead of Israel's version.

reply to post by searching4truth


Thank youvery much, search!

I am doing to much to look up my previous sources.

I know there were several more on the Gaza war thread (the big one).

Originally posted by A Conscience
The only act of terrorism I see here, is Israel inflicting on the civilian population in Gaza. The latest weapons being tested on the elderly, women, children and babies.

Then put some glasses on so you can see better.

The Palestinian terrorists rain down deadly rockets upon innocent Israeli civilians ... thousands of them .. for years and years.... in an effort to murder Israeli civilians.

The Palestinian terrorists hide behind children in the Gaza knowing full well that those children will die as human shields.

Arafat was offered a very good peace deal and it was very generous (especially considering he was a mass murdering terrorist who raped little boys for fun). Arafat turned it down because he knew peace would put the terrorists out of business.

The Palestinian terrorists are to blame for EVERY death in the Gaza.
Every last one of them.

Arafat was offered a very good peace deal and it was very generous (especially considering he was a mass murdering terrorist who raped little boys for fun). Arafat turned it down because he knew peace would put the terrorists out of business.

Yep just about there, the bit in brackets is where you lost your credibility.

reply to post by FlyersFan

Then put some glasses on so you can see better.

The Palestinian terrorists rain down deadly rockets upon innocent Israeli civilians ... thousands of them .. for years and years.... in an effort to murder Israeli civilians.

The Palestinian terrorists hide behind children in the Gaza knowing full well that those children will die as human shields.

Arafat was offered a very good peace deal and it was very generous (especially considering he was a mass murdering terrorist who raped little boys for fun). Arafat turned it down because he knew peace would put the terrorists out of business.

The Palestinian terrorists are to blame for EVERY death in the Gaza.
Every last one of them.

I can see very well without glasses, thank you! Maybe, you should think of putting one on yourself, if you have not already, as you are exhibiting strong symptoms of myopia.

Lets get some facts straight first.

Didn't I recall The Oslo Accord between Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin created a framework in which Israel would trade land for peace and negotiate a final settlement?

The Accords were wrapped-up in Oslo, Norway on 20 August 1993, and subsequently officially signed at a public ceremony in Washington D.C. on 13 September 1993 in the presence of PLO chairman Yasser Arafat, Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and US President Bill Clinton.

However, Israeli right-wingers, then led by Netanyahu, vowed to opposed the very principle of trading land for peace and to resist the surrender of any territory. He was intent on putting the nail to the coffin of the peace process.

In February 1994, an Israeli settler, Baruch Goldstein, massacred 29 Palestinians inside a religious site at Hebron.

This was the first suicide attack between the Palestinian and the Israelis. Contrary to what most people think or are forced fed by the media, this was the start of the first suicide attack and IT WAS NOT BY A PALESTINIAN.

The Palestinians protested in the streets, and was massacred by the Israelis for their effort. Subsequently Hamas unleashed retaliatory spate of suicide attacks against the Israelis.

Two months later, Benjamin Netanyahu narrowly defeated acting prime minister Peres and jammed the brakes on the peace process (Rabin as you know was assassinated by a Jew for his effort at signing the Oslo Accord).

Soon after taking office he lifted a four-year freeze on building new settlements in the West Bank and started the free for all for new settlers. He then compounded and inflamed the situation by authorizing the opening of a tunnel at an Islamic holy site in Jerusalem that provoked an outbreak of violence in which 61 Palestinians and 15 Israelis died.

So to say Arafat rejected a peace deal is false, and that the Palestinians are to be blamed for every deaths in Gaza is a bit rich!

With the land grabbing mentality of the Israelis and their disregard for human lives other than their own kind, you don't expect the Palestinians to lie back and take it?

reply to post by A Conscience


What is this , a textbook example of mixing a little truth with lots of lies?

n February 1994, an Israeli settler, Baruch Goldstein, massacred 29 Palestinians inside a religious site at Hebron.

True, maybe number of killed is even higher.

This was the first suicide attack between the Palestinian and the Israelis. Contrary to what most people think or are forced fed by the media, this was the start of the first suicide attack and IT WAS NOT BY A PALESTINIAN.

Lie. He did not kill himself, but was killed by people who eventually overcame him. Suicidal?????
Double lie. First suicide terror act in Israeli-Palestinian conflict happened in 1993 when Palestinian blew himself in a car.
Aka
en.wikipedia.org...

The Palestinians protested in the streets, and was massacred by the Israelis for their effort

Triple lie. There were violent demonstrations, but "massacred for their effort"??? Who exactly was massacred and for what effort?

authorizing the opening of a tunnel at an Islamic holy site in Jerusalem that provoked an outbreak of violence in which 61 Palestinians and 15 Israelis died.

It is a Jewish holy site too. WAKF does not ask anyone when they dig at temple mount, in their jurisdiction. Tunnels are outside, in Israeli jurisdiction.
And violence was started by Palestinians.

to lie back

Yes i do expect to hear lies.

For those of you that are interested I have just uploaded the Mark Regev Interview trying to defend the indefensible!

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by ZeroKnowledge

Lie. He did not kill himself, but was killed by people who eventually overcame him. Suicidal?????
Double lie. First suicide terror act in Israeli-Palestinian conflict happened in 1993 when Palestinian blew himself in a car.

Dictionary definition:a course of action that is disastrously damaging to oneself or one's own interest. Relating to or denoting a violent act or attack carried out by a person who does not expect to survive it.

Correction. First suicide attack after the Oslo Accord.

Triple lie. There were violent demonstrations, but "massacred for their effort"??? Who exactly was massacred and for what effort?

The Palestinians were shot dead for protesting. I thought that was clear.

Originally posted by A Conscience
Lets get some facts straight first.

Yes .. you need to be straightened out.

CAMP DAVID TALKS ... With Bill Clinton.

Arafat refused peace. He, and the Palestinian terrorists who have followed him, all have blood on their hands.

This could have been over back during the Bill Clinton years.
But peace would put the Palestinian terrorists out of business.

So to say Arafat rejected a peace deal is false,

No... It's true. Arafat rejected peace. He was a mass murdering pedophile and he rejected a fantastic peace plan that gave them nearly eveyrthing they had been whining about.

that the Palestinians are to be blamed for every deaths in Gaza is a bit rich!

It's the truth. This could have been over many years ago. The palestinians rejected the very, very, nice peace plan from Camp David. Therefore .. this is ALL on Arafat and those that have followed him.

ALL OF IT.

Originally posted by Seekerof
The corrupt and defunct UN is notorious for its anti-semitism, as well as having an established and historical anti-Israel bias. Accordingly, the alleged biased findings of this UN report is a given.

BS!

Israel broke international law, this is not an assumption or biased opinion, this is FACT.

I fully expect Israel supporters to deny all truth though, it's what they did throughout the massacre. Denial is Israels only defense. And they, and their supporters, do it very well.

There is a BIG difference between being an Anti-Semite and an Anti-Zionist. I am against ANY nation that massacres a population, steals their land, imprisons them, executes them at will and then lies about it. I am critical of any nation or government which defies international law (the US for example) and then uses blatant propaganda and false information to defend their actions.

The leadership of Israel is a dangerous government. These are facts as borne out by their actions against the innocent people of Gaza.

Hamas was mentioned in the report, several times, despite Israel stating the contrary. The UN repeatedly stated that Hamas were also using harmful and illegal tactics, despite Israel stating that they were not pointing this out.

I have seen, with my own eyes, and I have heard, with my own ears, Israel spokespeople blatantly lying on camera. I've seen them refusing to respond to direct facts. I have even seen them censoring the free press!

We've all seen this, so no amount of blatant BS will convince anyone that poor Israel is a victim here.

reply to post by detachedindividual



Oh, my friend, I fear that education and independent thought are lost arts. I couldn't agree with you more. I also find it incredibly revolting that in the current case, some are reduced to belittling and making outright lies against Arafat, a man who has been dead for nearly five years. I think when such actions are taken the opposition has run out of legitimate and factual arguements.

In this particular case, Israel made a gross violation both in rule of law and basic ethics, end of story. We can go back and forth and disect each time they have battled but that will not change the facts of this case.

I find this to be pretty telling if the numbers are true. And from the kind of things I have heard the UN say about Israel, I will side that the numbers are correct.

In fact, of over 700 General Assembly resolutions passed since the UN's 1945 establishment, nearly 450 condemn Israel. None have been passed against any Arab country nor any Arab terrorist organizations! In other words, out of 190 nations in the United Nations, over sixty percent of all General Assembly resolutions condemned just ONE member, Israel!

www.masada2000.org...

UN has a vendetta against Israel IMO.

The United Nations' Campaign Against Israel

www.heritage.org...

The United Nation's War Against Israel

www.capmag.com...

reply to post by jam321


Yes, the UN has condemned Israel many, many times for various and multiple human rights violations in regard to their treatment of Palastinians. Does pointing out that Israel, at times, does not allow food into Gaza, cuts water and electricity, does not allow people through check points for work and schooling, etc. automatically make them anti Israel? It would appear that any time the UN calls them out on their b.s. they are clearly anti Israel. I do not think that is the case, I think that Israel wants to do whatever it wants to do and if anyone calls them on their atrocious treatment of the Palastinians all of a sudden that person or group or organization all of a sudden they are anti Israel. B.S.

reply to post by searching4truth

Does pointing out that Israel, at times, does not allow food into Gaza, cuts water and electricity, does not allow people through check points for work and schooling, etc. automatically make them anti Israel?

Border- Does Israel not have the right to control its borders and who it allows in?

Was Egypt condemned for closing their side of the border and not allowing food into Gaza?

My point is very simple. Condemn Israel if they are really responsible but judge others by the same sword. Hold the PLO and Hamas accountable for the terrorist that are freely running loose in their backyard. Quit saying Israel this, Israel that and then poor Palestinians. Condemn Egypt for its role in food not getting food through. Making it one sided IMO is a vendetta.

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
This may a bit off but...

Didn't the UN admit it allowed Palestinian terrorists to enter the UN building and attack Israeli troops from there, using the UN as cover????

I won't take the time to look it up now, but it was posted from several sources.

I know, how dare I ruin people fun by bringing the truth.

Of course you won't post your sources, as no reliable ones exist.

Your post is just an attempt to smear by false rumour and innuendo.