The Disproportionate Propaganda Against Israel

Originally posted by Libertygal
reply to post by ElectricUniverse

 

What I find interesting about this all is the propoganda coming from the terrorists is what is being regurgitated by the anti-Israel crowd. They are being used as mouthpieces for the terrorists, and don't even realize it.

So they spout all this propoganda provided to them via Al-Jazeera and other terroism biased news sources, yet totally ignore and deny other media accounts, including those in the US.

Do they even care what the source of the news is?

Why so much faith in the terrorists news, yet no faith in any other media? Because it fits their agenda as well.

I can only wonder when people will wake up and realize the hate they are spewing is coming from terrorists, and they are being used as willing and gullible mouthpieces. For gods sake, at least get paid to spread their propoganda.

have you ever enquired as to who owns and controls american media? its the same zionist scum who control its politicians.

ariel sharon (the infamous israeli butcher) even admitted it.

Originally posted by Skellon
reply to post by Apolon

 

The ugly truth;

Without military superiority, Israel would cease to exist.

Without a 'heavy handed' response, Israel would cease to exist.

Israel continues to exist purely because it uses a heavy handed approach to provocation.

...

Continue to kid yourself that Israel is a bully and that if it refrained from its 'heavy handed' approach and withdrew from settlements that are in contention currently, that everyone would be happy.

Everyone except Israel... as it would soon cease to exist!
[edit on 3-6-2010 by Skellon]

why dont you kill them all?
you got nukes. use it. wipe the palestinians out.
why do you want to live in a constant state of war?
thats being stupid.

reply to post by FuGGer


Contrary to recent accusations on here, I am not an IDF disinformation agent, I am not a Mossad agent, I am not Israeli and I am not a Jew.

I am however, objective in that I research the perspective of both parties; I do not dismiss one sides' reporting of events, contrary to many posters on here.





[edit on 4-6-2010 by Skellon]

reply to post by intrepid

"Nope, I didn't watch any of the videos. Old news and probably wouldn't be here right now if Israel hadn't screwed up in a major way. EU points to "people like us" and not at "people like him", those that swallow the Israeli propaganda hook, line and sinker."

Hi intrepid,

Have you seen the OP's video contributions before?

Originally posted by Sky watcher
I think ATS should be ashamed of its moderators who support anyone that teaches their young children to hate this much and blow themselves up.

Sky watcher,

I really hate to say this, but your reading comprehension skills appear to be suffering from "your side of the topic blinkers"

I suggest you re-read the post to which you refer to again without your "jump on anything that doesn't strictly conform to my own opinion in blind support of Israel" glasses on and try and inwardly digest it.

When you do that, you will find that there is no mention of supporting anything.

What there is, in an observation that Israel seems to be hitting the wrong notes with world opinion on a regular basis.

You may try and twist that for your own propagandic purposes to try and have a dig at myself, and other ATS staff, but frankly, its not going to work I will call you out on it every time you do it.

I do not support any act of violence, by anyone. Anyone includes BOTH sides of the current cycle of violence in the middle east, be it conducted by either muslim IDIOTS or jewish IDIOTS. Simply put both sides are as bad as each other, because both sides seemingly want to perpetuate the violence without actually seeking a dedicated solution.

And on that basis, there is common ground, because both perpetrators of violence are, as I have highlighted, IDIOTS.

When both sides realise their common bond, maybe they will be wise enough to develop a solution.

Showing blind, unequivocal support for either side in such a violent conflict just perpetuates the cycle of violence, which is where Einsteins definition of madness comes into play, as I pointed out.

I find it strange that I have to point that out to such an intelligent poster in such a stark manner.

Here are some disproportianate statistics about about the children that have been killed by both sides since 2000:

Israeli Children: 124 Palestinian Children: 1446

1 child killed by either side is too many. It matters not that 1 child was killed by a suicide bomber in Jerusalem and that the other was killed by a missile strike on his neighbors home somewhere in Gaza. These statistics should tear the hearts out of the leaders responsible. I'll never understand what it would take to continue ordering the attacks where innocents will knowingly be killed. These statistics delegitimize anyone's claim of righteousness or just actions.

Remember These Children has been documenting and listing the children killed by both sides. Here's an introduction about them:

IN ANY CONFLICT, the death of innocent noncombatants is deplorable, and lamented by all. It is the death of children, however, that troubles us the most, for children are seen to be innocent in a way adults are not.
From September 29, 2000, when the current Palestinian intifada erupted, through January 18, 2008, at least 1446 Palestinian and 124 Israeli youths under the age of 18 were killed in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. Thousands more have been injured, many permanently.
Remember These Children lists each of these 1570 deaths. Arranged chronologically by date of death, each entry includes the child’s name, hometown, how the child was killed and, where available, the nature of the fatal injury. The documentation, though painful, conveys the personal ­reality of these terrible statistics. The waste of human life—of hope and future promise—is almost too great to contemplate.
Too many of these children died in the course of what should have been normal childhood pleasures—playing soccer, eating pizza, shopping for candy, or going to or from school. Others were at home, looking out their window, eating dinner or playing in their front yard.

Read the rest of the introduction here:

The calendar of children killed starting September 2000:
Remember These Children



[edit on 4-6-2010 by primus2012]

Seems like that project megaphone is working at break-neck speed to plug the leaks... Three pro-israel threads in one day. Whoda thunk it?

Chrono

reply to post by primus2012


www.rememberthesechildren.org...

It is certainly tragic to see such a waste of life, conflict is brutal and collateral casualties are most unfortunate.


On a technicallity; The ages of most of the deceased children on that link are infact of an age not considered to be 'children' any longer.

www.wordiq.com...

Child - Definition

A child (plural: children) is a young human. Depending on context it may mean someone who is not yet an adult, or someone who has not yet reached puberty (someone who is prepubescent).

From ages 9-13 , a different type of 'education' begins;

Tomorrow's Pioneers (Arabic: رواد الغد‎; also The Pioneers of Tomorrow) is a children's program, broadcast since April 13, 2007 on the official Palestinian Hamas television station, Al-Aqsa TV (Arabic: مرئية الأقصى قناة الأقصى‎). The show features young host Saraa Barhoum and her co-host, a large costumed animal as they perform skits (or "scenes") and discuss life in Palestine in a seminar fashion with call-ins from children (typically of age 9-13 with some as young as 3). While ostensibly a show about children's education presented in a format similar to such common western shows as Sesame Street or Barney & Friends, Tomorrow's Pioneers additionally contains Hamas-inspired antisemitism, Islamic extremism, anti-Americanism, and other anti-Western themes.

en.wikipedia.org...


At age 16 in the United Kingdom you can join the armed forces;

For soldiers, you have to be aged 15 years and 7 months to apply. You can then be enlisted in the September at age 16 after your GCSE exams.

www.armyjobs.mod.uk...


Therefore, going by their established categorisation, a Palestinian aged 17 and 11 months, carrying a weapon, would be categorised as a 'child'.

Disclaimer; The links I have cited are not 'Zionsit controlled propaganda'.

However upon closer examination of the rememberthesechildren.org site, I click on the 'About us' link;

www.rememberthesechildren.org...

I now notice that this publication is part of/affliliated with the 'American Educational Trust'.

I click on the link and it redirects me to washington-report.org...

On this page I notice in the left column there is a Free Gaza Movement donation link.

So, I look up Free Gaza and find the site via google www.freegaza.org...

The lead coalition partners included:
* Insani Yardim Vakfi (IHH), the largest coalition partner, contributing 2 Turkish-flagged cargo ships, the Turkish-flagged passenger ship "Mavi Marmara," and 380 Turkish nationals to the effort. This was IHH's first attempt to break the Gaza blockade.

So I wiki 'Insani Yardim Vakfi' (IHH)

en.wikipedia.org...

IHH is a member of the "Union of Good" (Itelaf al-Khair, also known as the "Charity Coalition").[citation needed] According to Palestinian intelligence, this organization "is considered -- with regard to material support -- one of the biggest Hamas supporters."[citation needed] Israel outlawed the Union of Good in February 2002, and the United States named it a specially designated global terrorist entity in November 2008. According to the U.S. Treasury Department, the Union of Good was created by the Hamas leadership "in order to facilitate the transfer of funds to Hamas." Intelligence underpinning the U.S. designation noted that the group "facilitates the transfer of tens of millions of dollars a year to Hamas-managed associations." It also "acts as a broker for Hamas by facilitating financial transfers between a web of charitable organizations...and Hamas-controlled organizations in the West Bank and Gaza."

Always pays to be objective and not accept the first source that supports the point you are trying to make.

Peace.

[edit on 4-6-2010 by Skellon]

I'm going to say it again, as I have in another thread:

"Can anyone say, MEGAPHONE?"

GIYUS - GET OFF ATS, AND NOW! You scummy Orwellian dirtbags.

Parallex.

Originally posted by Parallex
I'm going to say it again, as I have in another thread:

"Can anyone say, MEGAPHONE?"

GIYUS - GET OFF ATS, AND NOW! You scummy Orwellian dirtbags.

Parallex.

How on earth is my post 'Orwellian'?

Unless you are so dillusional that you consider wiki to be run by the 'Zionist Regime'?



[edit on 4-6-2010 by Skellon]

reply to post by Skellon


Did you see me mention you ANYWHERE in my post?

Guily conscience perhaps? Or are GIYUS not giving you the love?

Parallex.

Originally posted by Parallex
reply to post by Skellon

 

Did you see me mention you ANYWHERE in my post?

Guily conscience perhaps? Or are GIYUS not giving you the love?

Parallex.

I apologise for the misunderstanding then, I am just to used to having 'MEGAPHONE' as a response to intelligent debate lately.

This is too disgusting even watching PBS the Isreali's have their fake videos,now don't believe the actual eye witnesses we all know they lie,I think the OP should take a"proper gander" at the facts

reply to post by Skellon

Hi Skellon,
I don't wish to seem like I'm attacking your opinions, okay?

But the Technicality you brought up about age/children/adults, was, despite the effort you put in, a completely unecessary post.

Yes the facts may be correct, but, arguing the age is really grabbing at straws here.

We as adults know that children do not really mature until in their mid 20's in most cases. And to me anyone under 18 is still a baby in real terms.. even if they are already fighting in wars or other horrific things.

Since the bottom of the bucket has been reached for the argument, can we now move on to other topics of interest or concern?


[edit on 4-6-2010 by Tayesin]

The title of this thread is misleading.

Based on the title, one is to swallow the notion that the propaganda against Israel is disproportionate to the propaganda that Israel sends out.

This is in fact a biased statement, and therefore credibility is lost.

You showed a complete disregard for facts.

Objectivity would yield to the fact that Israel has more propaganda activists on the internet than any other nation.

I am not against Israel, I am against the leadership of it.

Same with America and Palestine, and most of the EU now that I think about it!

But I digress.

Originally posted by orangutang

have you ever enquired as to who owns and controls american media? its the same zionist scum who control its politicians.

ariel sharon (the infamous israeli butcher) even admitted it.

Really?... So CNN which is ran by a known Communist, Ted Turner, is controlled by the zionists?...

MSNBC which is ran by left wingers is controlled by zionists?...

For crying out loud people....

Originally posted by Mr Objectivity
The title of this thread is misleading.

Based on the title, one is to swallow the notion that the propaganda against Israel is disproportionate to the propaganda that Israel sends out.

This is in fact a biased statement, and therefore credibility is lost.

You showed a complete disregard for facts.

Objectivity would yield to the fact that Israel has more propaganda activists on the internet than any other nation.

I am not against Israel, I am against the leadership of it.

Same with America and Palestine, and most of the EU now that I think about it!

But I digress.

Wow...just wow... have ANY of you even read the "San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea"?....

It is obvious who the biased people are, who have lost all objectivity, and all credibility.

Let's actually read whether or not Israel committed an illegal act by boarding the ship, which they had made their intentions clear were going to breach the blockade, and they did not steer their vessels to an Israeli port as they were asked, SEVERAL times.

SECTION V : NEUTRAL MERCHANT VESSELS AND CIVIL AIRCRAFT

Neutral merchant vessels

67. Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they:

(a) are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture;
(b) engage in belligerent acts on behalf of the enemy;
(c) act as auxiliaries to the enemy s armed forces;
(d) are incorporated into or assist the enemy s intelligence system;
(e) sail under convoy of enemy warships or military aircraft; or
(f) otherwise make an effective contribution to the enemy s military action, e.g., by carrying military materials, and it is not feasible for the attacking forces to first place passengers and crew in a place of safety. Unless circumstances do not permit, they are to be given a warning, so that they can re-route, off-load, or take other precautions.
...

www.icrc.org...

The above INCLUDES international, aka neutral waters.... so guess what?... Israel DID NOT commit any crimes... The crew of the ship which refused to stop, and started a violent revolt were the criminals...


[edit on 4-6-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

and I also forgot the following.

PART II : REGIONS OF OPERATIONS

SECTION I : INTERNAL WATERS, TERRITORIAL SEA AND ACHIPELAGIC WATERS

14. Neutral waters consist of the internal waters, territorial sea, and, where applicable, the archipelagic waters, of neutral States. Neutral airspace consists of the airspace over neutral waters and the land territory of neutral States.

15. Within and over neutral waters, including neutral waters comprising an international strait and waters in which the right of archipelagic sea lanes passage may be exercised, hostile actions by belligerent forces are forbidden. A neutral State must take such measures as are consistent with Section II of this Part, including the exercise of surveillance, as the means at its disposal allow, to prevent the violation of its neutrality by belligerent forces.
...

www.icrc.org...

Breaching a blockade, and not steering towards an Israeli port, or stopping when asked, and when the crew of the ships had already stated their intention was to breach the blockade is a "hostile action". So who are the criminals again?...

BTW, let me ask you all who keep shouting that Israel committed a criminal act...

Can you be outside the property of another person and shout that you are going to break into their house?... Is it legal to threaten another person, and make it clear that you plan to break in into their house, or property even if you are standing in public property?

and if the person whose property you want to break into asks you to stop, and you decide to attack them, what happens to you? Think about it.

[edited to add comments]



[edit on 4-6-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

This was apparently predicted in the Bible (I guess??)

It's hard to tell. You be the judge.

Zechariah 12

3 On that day, when all the nations of the earth are gathered against her, I will make Jerusalem an immovable rock for all the nations. All who try to move it will injure themselves.

www.biblegateway.com...

Read the whole 1-9 though.

[edit on 4-6-2010 by muzzleflash]

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


For a blockade to be legal the party doing the blockading has to have declared war on the party being blockaded... and/or the party doing the blockading has to be OCCUPYING the party being blockaded.

Since Israel will not admit to either of these situations existing, the blockade immediately becomes illegal by default. You can't have it both ways... either the blockade is legal and Israel is at war with Gaza and/or occupying Gaza... or if they say they are not doing either of these, then the blockade is illegal... This has already being pointed out by numerous people in different threads and STILL it keeps being ignored by the 'Legal Blockade' propononents.

So...That being the case we are back to the Israeli military having illegally boarded a sovereign vessel in international waters, using an ILLEGAL blockade (see above) as the reason.

Since the blockade is illegal, and their act is illegal...Having committed piracy they then compounded this with killing some of those defending their ship in international waters, and kidnapping the rest.