CNN Refuses to Play the Truth: Hamas Jew-Killing Moused

[CptStern]

meh grammar/proper sentence structure is for chumps


btw the way I speak is exactly like that of Cpt James T Kirk

Scotty ..warp factor 5 ..onmymark..make-rocketship-go-now... ..Mr ...Spock ..what ..are ..our ..coordi..nates ...


so that explains ...the dots

 

[Solaris]

Yes Stern has got lazier with the Grammar, but I don't mind.

Manc is a prat and should be bant.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

erm..theres a difference between stoning beheading, boming ..legalised rape, sex with girls under the ages of 12 and "muslim thighing" (google that it will make you sick. unless you are cptstern..any man who enjoys rape of kids will prob enjoy what he finds on googling that..

You are, in a word, insane. Stern has kids of his own, something which you will not achieve for another 20 years, if ever (you'll have to go through puberty first you see)

 

[Manc]

You are, in a word, insane.

actually im just more informed and hold a different opinion to you.

Stern has kids of his own,

me too..good for him.

something which you will not achieve for another 20 years)

as you dont read anything properly before posting...il say it again.i have three children. plus i am happily married thanks

(you'll have to go through puberty first you see)

are you sure you know about that subject fully?:|

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

as you dont read anything properly before posting...il say it again.i have three children. plus i am happily married thanks

Good for you. And I ahve read through the thread.

 

[15357]

Yeah, yeah. Let's get over the whole marrying thing and get back to killing each other verbally, shall we? And by 'we', I mean you.

 

[Manc]

i am me, you are you.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Hye nemesis, I got a question for ya. When you were a kid what do you think would have affected you more, some stupid mouse on TV or the death of a close relative because of bomb that came from another country. Think about it.

www.pmw.org.il

Propaganda of the Palestinian Authority TV to indoctrinate they're children with or without loved ones. This is just sick if you can attempt at defending this and I dare say you're almost an agent of false Jihad.

Palestines Hitler Youth.

CNN Downplays Jew-Killing Mouse

Just as biased as Fox. They ignored the part where "Mickey" was dancing around acting like he was holding an AK47. I would'nt be that jubilant if they were killing me. This is just insulting to have, on the air, this crap being overuled and overlooked.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Benjamin Netanyahu


so what's it going to be? admit hypocracy or admit that it's not so clear cut as you suggest

The King David Hotel bombings actually came after British Troops were refusing to keep the riots under order and were actually in support of the militants who inspired them against the Judiac Populations inside Palestine.

Infact, the whole purpose for Israel existing has actually a lot to do with self defense instead of a zionist nationalistic strategy because before those riots were instigated, the Jewish state to most judiacs actually already existed inside Juerusalem.

Moderate or Left Judiacs even insinuate that Israel, were it not for the wars against its people, is still a country thats probably not so legitimate.

 

[CptStern]

The King David Hotel bombings actually came after British Troops were refusing to keep the riots under order and were actually in support of the militants who inspired them against the Judiac Populations inside Palestine.

so you're saying acts of terror against an occupying force is justified ...right, anyone see the obvious hypocrisy here?

 

[No Limit]

Propaganda of the Palestinian Authority TV to indoctrinate they're children with or without loved ones. This is just sick if you can attempt at defending this and I dare say you're almost an agent of false Jihad.

Palestines Hitler Youth.

WTF is wrong with you? I already commented on this with the post you quoted. But I guess I have to repeat myself.

It has nothing to do with defense of what they are doing, it has to do with the realization of why this is happening. But you are far too blind to understand why it is happening so there really is no point in repeating the same point that has already been hammered in to your head on several occassions, a point you continue to ignore. You are a hypocrite, you will say this is evil and then turn around and defend terrorism on Israel's part saying it was okay because it was self defense. What the **** do you think Palestenians are doing this for? Offsense? No, it has everything to do with self defense and that has always been the case ever since Israel has been snatching away more land from them.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

so you're saying acts of terror against an occupying force is justified ...right, anyone see the obvious hypocrisy here?

No CptStern, what I'm saying is that there was a class, racial, and religious war going on throughout the Middle East as Nationalist aimed to define themselves culturally without Western Intervention, and a part of those acts was to exodus Christians and Jews from Middle Eastern territories.

Because the riots that would occur later in Palestine were haphazardly supported by British Army deserters or active members, return strikes were made by the Haganah and Irgun because they viewed Britain as forewarding the cause of Islamo Facism against they're people throughout those regions.

Your also forgetting a particular military raid, perpetrated before the King David Hotel bombings, by the British Military and Arab Legion against Judiacs, so as to deny they're proclamation of a Jewish state.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Agatha

It was a tense time. On June 16, 1946 the Palmach blew up eight international roadway and rail bridges. On June 17, the LEHI attacked railway operations in Haifa. Shortly afterwards, the Irgun kidnapped six British officers. One officer escaped, and two were released. The Irgun announced that the remaining officers would be released only in exchange for the commutation of death sentences for two Irgun members.[2]

Historian Thurston Clarke asserts that the British government wished to bolster army morale and forestall a coup d'etat in which community leaders would unilaterally proclaim a Jewish state.[3] Another objective was to dissuade the Haganah, and particularly its operational arm the Palmach, from undertaking further attacks against British troops and officials.


[edit] Operation
The British operations were extensive. Low flying planes circled Jerusalem. Roadblocks were maintained, trains were flagged down, and passengers were evacuated and escorted home. Special licenses were required for the operations of emergency vehicles. Curfews were imposed.

Arms caches were discovered. At Kibbutz Yagur, the troops found more than 300 rifles, some 100 2-inch mortars, more than 400,000 bullets, some 5,000 grenades and 78 revolvers. The arms were displayed at a press conference, and all the men of Yagur were arrested.[4]

Agatha triggered echoes of the Holocaust in the minds of many people. Women ripped their clothing to expose concentration camp tattoos. There were incidents of people in the settlements herded into cages while screaming that this was what the Nazis did. A minority among the British troops exacerbated the situation by shouting "Heil Hitler," scrawling swastikas on walls, and referring to gas chambers while conducting searches.[5]

You're also forgetting that before Operation Agatha, British troops were not responding as a protection force against the riots perpetraited against the Judiacs or were giving the instigators military asylum or assistance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riots_in_Palestine_of_1920

For more complete list of the riots and atrocities instigated by British Forces and the Arab Legion, visit the link below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab-Israeli_conflict

it has to do with the realization of why this is happening.

Yes, here's why it will continue to happen and mainly to the Palestinian Youth.

www.pmw.org.il/asx/PMW_MickeyMouseClone.asx

You are a hypocrite, you will say this is evil and then turn around and defend terrorism on Israel's part saying it was okay because it was self defense. What the **** do you think Palestenians are doing this for? Offsense?

According to the elected party in control, it has to be offense to reclaim ALL of Palestine. Without pity or mercy. All bloodshed.

www.pmw.org.il/asx/PMW_Hamas_Suicide.asx

According to history, thats how its always been.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Israeli_War

According to Hamas, which has in a completely opposite role besides the Fatah, wants military action and atrocities against Israel. Offense is what they admit to as a part of they're plan. The cross border raids into Israel were apart of this and the reprisal actions costed them and Israel dearly, wether politically or militarily.

www.pmw.org.il/asx/pmw_hamas_post_election.asx

No, it has everything to do with self defense and that has always been the case ever since Israel has been snatching away more land from them.

Actually ...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/12/world/main833999.shtml

Israeli Army Leaves Gaza

NEVE DEKALIM, Gaza Strip, Sept. 12, 2005

(AP) Flames shot skyward from four abandoned synagogues in the Gaza Strip on Monday, as thousands of celebrating Palestinians thronged through former Jewish settlements and headed straight for the only buildings left standing.

At Neve Dekalim, gunman from several militant factions stormed through after Israeli soldiers left Monday morning, completing the Gaza pullout. Some Palestinians planted a flag from the ruling Fatah movement on the roof of a rabbinical college for Jewish settlers, as others set a fire inside.

The synagogue in the isolated settlement of Morag in southern Gaza was set ablaze minutes after hundreds of Palestinians stormed in.

"They (Israelis) destroyed our homes and our mosques," said a man who gave his name only as Abu Ahmed. "Today it is our turn to destroy theirs."

The synagogues were a focus of Palestinian anger after 38 years of Israeli occupation, primarily because they were among the only buildings left standing. Shortly after removing the last of the settlers two weeks ago, Israel sent in bulldozers to level the houses, leaving only a few public buildings and the synagogues.

In Netzarim, the synagogue was on fire before dawn, with bright orange flames leaping through the roof and the walls.

Helpless Palestinian police stood by and watched, admitting they were outnumbered by the crowds and had little motivation to stop them. An officer who refused to give his name said: "The people have the right to do what they are doing."

Israel TV said crowds of Palestinians entered Kfar Darom in central Gaza and set several fires, including in the synagogue.

As they left their homes last month, the settlers took the sacred Torah scrolls from their synagogues, as well as prayer books and other holy items - symbolizing the end of the use of the buildings as houses of prayer.

Last year Israel's Cabinet ruled the buildings would be torn down. Since the evacuation of the settlers, however, rabbis mounted a high-profile campaign to save the buildings, demanding the government see to it that they would be protected by the Palestinians or by international organizations. On Sunday, the Israeli Cabinet reversed itself, voting not to destroy the synagogue buildings.

The Palestinians refused to protect them, saying they wanted nothing that symbolized the occupation to remain. Early Monday, Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas said the structures would be dismantled like all the others.

"They left empty buildings that used to be temples, but they removed all the religious symbols, and they are no longer religious places," he said.

If the peace process continues to succeed without intervention or war between terrorist factions and the IDF, it may mean a future where the Golan Heights are also no longer occupied.

Suffice to say, nobody digs under the border again to launch new attacks, or fires Qassams at Israeli villages to prompt a military response out of Israel.

Here's Hillarys take on the PATV Propaganda and Islamo Fasso textbooks that have surfaced in recent years:

http://www.pmw.org.il/asx/PMW_Hillary6.asx

 

[CptStern]

No CptStern, what I'm saying is that there was a class, racial, and religious war going on throughout the Middle East as Nationalist aimed to define themselves culturally without Western Intervention, and a part of those acts was to exodus Christians and Jews from Middle Eastern territories.

Because the riots that would occur later in Palestine were haphazardly supported by British Army deserters or active members, return strikes were made by the Haganah and Irgun because they viewed Britain as forewarding the cause of Islamo Facism against they're people throughout those regions.

Your also forgetting a particular military raid, perpetrated before the King David Hotel bombings, by the British Military and Arab Legion against Judiacs, so as to deny they're proclamation of a Jewish state.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Agatha

You're also forgetting that before Operation Agatha, British troops were not responding as a protection force against the riots perpetraited against the Judiacs or were giving the instigators military asylum or assistance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riots_in_Palestine_of_1920

For more complete list of the riots and atrocities instigated by British Forces and the Arab Legion, visit the link below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab-Israeli_conflict

and? how does that in any way excuse the fact that you're justifying terrorism? I'm not asking for an explanation as to why it happened, I'm directly asking you why you think in this case terrorism was justified. Because using that same logic all attacks on jewish settlers is also legitimized ...so what's it going to be; the same rules across the board or admit hypocrisy?

 

[No Limit]

Actually ...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/...in833999.shtml

Israeli Army Leaves Gaza

You just don't get it, do you?

From the article:

as thousands of celebrating Palestinians thronged through former Jewish settlements and headed straight for the only buildings left standing.

Yes, thank you wonderful Israel for invading our land, destroying it, and then saying, well, nevermind, you guys can have this back.

What a wonderful country that israel is, it's a real wonder why those snobby palestinians hate them so much.

I know you really can not be that much of a hypocrite, just come out and say it already, you think Israel should control that entire region, don't you?

 

[K e r b e r o s]

and? how does that in any way excuse the fact that you're justifying terrorism?

Are we talking about an act of terrorism that also killed Arabic and Judaic bystanders? Or one that outlines exclusively the British Army Personell who lost they're lives in the bombing for commiting the Agatha Raid?

Yes, thank you wonderful Israel for invading our land, destroying it, and then saying, well, nevermind, you guys can have this back.

The social and political situation of relocating the settlers caused wide spread protest because the Israeli government promised them those lands to own for as long as they could afford it. The homes were torn down in protest, infact, the Israeli Military even sent in they're own soldiers to 'forcifully relocate' those that refused to the leave the returned territories to the Palestinians, however unfortunately, minor those returns actually were or overdue in terms of landspace given back.

People destroyed what was left on the lands, namely they're places of dwelling, because for them they just did'nt want anyone else to have it. Not the Israeli Military or it's Political Elite; not even the Palestinians.

If not them, then no one.

I know you really can not be that much of a hypocrite, just come out and say it already, you think Israel should control that entire region, don't you?

I don't even think Israel should be in existence today but given the circumstances I'm unwilling to say both sides or just one side has to call it quits and just simply walk off the world map tomorrow.

These people used to live in peace, and thats what I believe they can start doing. The steps down that road are going to be hard and unmercifully confusing, but in the end I still think its possible.

 

[CptStern]

Are we talking about an act of terrorism that also killed Arabic and Judaic bystanders? Or one that outlines exclusively the British Army Personell who lost they're lives in the bombing for commiting the Agatha Raid?

obviously you have no idea what you're talking about:

Ninety-one people were killed, most of them staff of the secretariat and the hotel: 28 British, 41 Arab, 17 Jewish, and 5 other. Around 45 people were injured.

since when are hotel staff also Soldiers? you'll make up any old shit to justify terrorism so long as it supports your views ..btw even if it was exclusively military targets then you are in fact justifying every single terrorist attack on soldiers from israel to iraq ..taking it further by implication you are saying the attack on lebanon was without justification because soliders are legitimate targets according to you

 

[K e r b e r o s]

obviously you have no idea what you're talking about:

Either confront the reality that, A. I do know what I'm talking about and, B. You have nothing to offer up for it as an effective rebuttal, or you C. Just stop trying altogether.

since when are hotel staff also Soldiers?

If you would be so kind to your own state of mental health to just, scroll up and read where I offered the question; Is the King David Hotel Bombing considered a terrorist act because of the Arab and Jewish Civilians killed by its blast -OR- is it considered a terrorist strike because it was at least unsuspected of the Judiac Haganah and Irgun to strike back for the Agatha Raid, which was aimed to supress local Judiacs from making a Declaration of Israeli Indepedence?

Until you answer me what it is that distinguishes these from being a return strike against not only Agatha but the unsupressed riots and murders against Jewish Citizens in Palestine, you can just forget that you and I had this debate because until I get those answers from you, its over.

 

[CptStern]

Either confront the reality that, A. I do know what I'm talking about and, B. You have nothing to offer up for it as an effective rebuttal, or you C. Just stop trying altogether.

you never confront reality ...anyways my point still stands

If you would be so kind to your own state of mental health to just, scroll up and read where I offered the question; Is the King David Hotel Bombing considered a terrorist act because of the Arab and Jewish Civilians killed by its blast -OR- is it considered a terrorist strike because it was at least unsuspected of the Judiac Haganah and Irgun to strike back for the Agatha Raid, which was aimed to supress local Judiacs from making a Declaration of Israeli Indepedence?

who the **** cares ..an act of terrrorism is an act of terrorism unless you're suggesting not all terrorism is the same ..as in it's ok that they used acts of terror but no one else

Until you answer me what it is that distinguishes these from being a return strike against not only Agatha but the unsupressed riots and murders against Jewish Citizens in Palestine, you can just forget that you and I had this debate because until I get those answers from you, its over.

holy **** it's lke talking to a wall ...what are you not understanding here? terror is terror ..are you suggesting the jews were exempt from acts of terror because of what excatly? because they were resisting occupation?

 

[K e r b e r o s]

you broke part A ...you dont confront reality ...anyways my point still stands

I'am confronting reality and I'm also confronting you. As to your one sentence rebuttals, try them with someone else because they're not holding your arguementive weight here when, especially, you cannot present something that stands as a legitimate counter-point.

who the **** cares

A lot of people and you've still not given me an answer.

holy **** it's lke talking to a wall

A wall that has both a well presented opinion and one that carries with it an array of resources to back them up. You're right, I'm not moving in this debate, because you have not given me a reason to.

 

[CptStern]

I'am confronting reality and I'm also confronting you. As to your one sentence rebuttals, try them with someone else because they're not holding your arguementive weight here when, especially, you cannot present something that stands as a legitimate counter-point.

it's like I'm talking to the Riddler here .."riddle me this .. the jews come naught but on the sabbath for they are chosen to lead passover in a rumbunctious show of palestinian authority, now we are the elite of camp david but forsooth! there are sins a plenty in the plains of abarham, but tread lightly should the moslem not tread as lightly"

ok I really dont understand your point (or about 70% of what you say) so lets go back to the original topic: are you justifying the terrorist bombing of the king david hotel? ..a yes or no reply will suffice ..no need to go on and on further clouding the issue with god knows what because I dont understan the majority of it ..yes or no?

A lot of people and you've still not given me an answer.

sigh ...I've already answered the goddam question: terrorism is terrorism ..debating what the causes were is immaterial to this debate ..you either agree that it was an act of barbarism or you justify the use of terrorism ..it's really as simple as that

A wall that has both a well presented opinion and one that carries with it an array of resources to back them up. You're right, I'm not moving in this debate, because you have not given me a reason to.

it's as if we're having two different and unrelated conversations ..ok for the last time stay on track ..is the bombing by jewish terrorists justified or not ..stop dancing around the issue I dont need/want an explanation on the background history of the chosen people

 

[leib10]

Who else thinks that the Hamas Mickey Mouse is the most hilarious, yet sad, thing of all time?

 

[K e r b e r o s]

sigh ...I've already answered the goddam question: terrorism is terrorism ..debating what the causes were is immaterial to this debate

I'm critical to this end -- is the King David Hotel Bombing considered a terrorist act because of the 17 Judiac and Arabic Civilians it killed, or, is it considered terrorism because the British Government did not expect a reprisal act for Agatha?

Some people will actually hinge that its only to be considered a terrorist act because it was carried out as a suprise attack against British Forces, whose people and all people at the time, did not know specifically that it was British Army Deserters who were helping local Imams and one particular Mufti, carry out riots, kidnappings and atrocities against local Judiacs.

Are you simply stating that this was a terrorist act altogether -- because if so, then every minor or major military operation in which a target had to be bombed would be considered a terrorist act, reguardless of who it was against and for what cause.

But therein lies my problem -- not all bombings can be associated as atrocities or terrorist acts so long as they're targets are legitimate military or active combat personel that you're at war with or have recently declared war on. The bunker-buster strikes against Saddam Huesseins leadership that wound up incidentally killing the families of those officers at the time, where those acts of terrorism because of the additional casualties around they're blast sites?

We can throw popular key phrases and words around like, "Shock and Awe" to superimpose that it was the intention of the Bush administration to kill those civilians -- but the actual and intended targets makes all the difference to some, as to whether or not a military operation was on that slippery slope of accidental or intended collateral damage.

Since they're was'nt much political rhetoric behind the attack on the King David Hotel, the Irgun and Haganah did'nt really have a military/politically hinge to rest on nor have an ego-centric military that wanted to display it's capacity in military fireworks. It was simply an operation to self-sabotage your own confiscated logistics and information so that it could'nt be handed down to your enemy for use against you.

Is that terrorism?

it's as if we're having two different and unrelated conversations

Last I checked, we were both discussing the same relevant issues and it was you who has let to bring something of an intellectual rebuttal to my claims backed up with sources or information in reguards to the following topic that we've been discussing:

The King David Hotel Bombing - Act of Terrorism or War?

Who else thinks that the Hamas Mickey Mouse is the most hilarious, yet sad, thing of all time?

Where I think the thread author thinks the video clip has been, "moused" is where CNN controversially hires Arab Translators from the Palestinian Authority TV Network to re-dub the text in favor of the Hamas Political Wing, aswell as cut out the end of the video-documented recording of the Hamas Mouse gesturing with an AK47.

Not exactly good for television.

 

[Nemesis6]

Who else thinks that the Hamas Mickey Mouse is the most hilarious, yet sad, thing of all time?

Hey, Tarabisho the talking chicken is just as hilarious when he tells kids to commit a massacre with an AK47 - http://video.google.com/url?docid=5...Lq6Psg&usg=AL29H202B1FOEygi8Zhpt-o8B2yuCzz_zA

 

[CptStern]

you missed this part of my post:

so lets go back to the original topic: are you justifying the terrorist bombing of the king david hotel? ..a yes or no reply will suffice ..no need to go on and on further clouding the issue with god knows what because I dont understan the majority of it ..yes or no?

yes or no?

I'm critical to this end -- is the King David Hotel Bombing considered a terrorist act because of the 17 Judiac and Arabic Civilians it killed, or, is it considered terrorism because the British Government did not expect a reprisal act for Agatha?

here we go again right back to square one ...sigh well at least your latest reply confirms what I've suspected all along: you're a hypocrite

ter-ror-ism:

1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

terrorism is terrorism, you're justifying terrorism ..anyways it doesnt matter who considers what ..the facts are clear ..a extremist group bombed a hotel killing military and civilian personel ..there was no declaration of war, they're not a sovereign nation, the swear no allegiance to any flag THEY ARE TERRORISTS ..using your logic every single jewish death ever commited as a result of terrorist attack is justified. Every single time an extremist group bombs a military/civilian target it's justified according to your logic ..how do you fail to see this? ..how can you sit there and justify acts of terrorism that claimed the lives of over 90 people?

Some people will actually hinge that its only to be considered a terrorist act because it was carried out as a suprise attack against British Forces, whose people and all people at the time, did not know specifically that it was British Army Deserters who were helping local Imams and one particular Mufti, carry out riots, kidnappings and atrocities against local Judiacs.

who cares? again you are justifying terrorism ..Osama Bin Laden is legitimized in your eyes then because his attack on the US are retaliatory for US/Israeli occupation of palestine (amongst other things) ..look I'm not interested in a goddam history lesson ..terrorism is terrorism:

... a bombing attack against the British government of Palestine by members of Irgun ? a militant Zionist organization ..... Members of the Irgun, dressed as Arabs, set off a bomb in the King David Hotel...

sounds like terrorists/terrorism to me, and to every other rational person ..the British see it as an act of terrorism as well:

In July 2006, right-wing Israelis including former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former members of Irgun attended a 60th anniversary celebration of the bombing, which was organized by the Menachem Begin Centre. The British Ambassador in Tel Aviv and the Consul-General in Jerusalem dissented, saying "We do not think that it is right for an act of terrorism, which led to the loss of many lives, to be commemorated."

Are you simply stating that this was a terrorist act altogether

holy shit it took you this long to figure that out? of course I'm saying it's an act of terrorism ..was the bombing of the USS cole not an act of terrorism? when extremeists bombed marine barracks in lebanon was that not an act of terrorism? when a screaming Boeing 757 slammed into the side of the pentagon was that not an act of terrorism? they were all military, therefore legitimate, targets according to your warped logic

-- because if so, then every minor or major military operation in which a target had to be bombed would be considered a terrorist act, reguardless of who it was against and for what cause.

no your sweeping generalization is completely without basis: Irgun are not a nation, no war was declared therefore they are illegal combatants; attacking targets for the purpose of spreading terror and their political ideology ..the classic definition of terrorism

But therein lies my problem -- not all bombings can be associated as atrocities or terrorist acts so long as they're targets are legitimate military or active combat personel that you're at war with or have recently declared war on.

every single attack on US forces in iraq is legitimate then? it's exactly the same thing

The bunker-buster strikes against Saddam Huesseins leadership that wound up incidentally killing the families of those officers at the time, where those acts of terrorism because of the additional casualties around they're blast sites?

link me, the details are foggy, I cant remember the incident, you're going to have to provide information for me to make an accurate assessment

We can throw popular key phrases and words around like, "Shock and Awe" to superimpose that it was the intention of the Bush administration to kill those civilians -- but the actual and intended targets makes all the difference to some, as to whether or not a military operation was on that slippery slope of accidental or intended collateral damage.

you just dont understand the difference between a nation and a militant extremeist group ..please prove to me Irgun is indeed a nation that MUST abide by the geneva accords and then we're getting somewhere ...Legitimate military forces DO NOT DRESS AS ARABS TO SNEAK IN AND PLANT BOMBS IN CIVILIAN/MILITARY TARGETS ..the rules of engagement do not apply to terrorists

Since they're was'nt much political rhetoric behind the attack on the King David Hotel, the Irgun and Haganah did'nt really have a military/politically hinge to rest on nor have an ego-centric military that wanted to display it's capacity in military fireworks. It was simply an operation to self-sabotage your own confiscated logistics and information so that it could'nt be handed down to your enemy for use against you.

Is that terrorism?

honestly I have no idea what you're saying ..tip: use simple words, it gets your point across far more effectively ...this is not an insult, I am not avoiding the issue ..I really honestly dont understand what you're saying

Last I checked, we were both discussing the same relevant issues and it was you who has let to bring something of an intellectual rebuttal to my claims backed up with sources or information in reguards to the following topic that we've been discussing:

The King David Hotel Bombing - Act of Terrorism or War?

nope, an act of war implies conflict between two NATIONS ..irgun are an extremist militant group with NO nation status, they are not recognised by any nation/group/individual as a sovereign nation ..your suggestion that it was an act of war is idiotic because they have none of the atrributes that would qualify them as a legitimate party. There was no declaration of war and even if they had it is not recognised because THEY ARE NOT A NATION! they are an extremist militant group like any other extremist group in iraq, afghanistan or israel

A declaration of war is a formal declaration issued by a national government indicating that a state of war exists between that nation, and one or more others [nations].

Where I think the thread author thinks the video clip has been, "moused" is where CNN controversially hires Arab Translators from the Palestinian Authority TV Network to re-dub the text in favor of the Hamas Political Wing, aswell as cut out the end of the video-documented recording of the Hamas Mouse gesturing with an AK47.

Not exactly good for television.

the above is a good example of how you dont make sense ..how do you go from trying to explain "moused" (which was an obvious misspelling of the word mouse) to suggesting CNN is purposefully and knowingly sending out disinformation to suit a specific agenda? the two are completely unrelated ..this is why you frustrate me to no end ..ask a simple question and get 15 paragraphs on unrelated tangents that do nothing except ignore and cloud the issue ...there's a reason why simplicity in language often wins debates ..verbal fluff really serves no other purpose but to hide/mask the fact that the speaker either doesnt know what he's talking about or that he's avoiding the question altogether

 

[K e r b e r o s]

you missed this part of my post:

King David Hotel Bombing = terrorist? No, not nessecarly.
King David Hotel Bombing = Most accurate precision strike of the 20th century? No.

The King David Hotel Bombing is one of those slippery slopes that can go either way. For example, you can say that simply because bystanders and hotel staff where killed in the bombing against British Army Personel, that the bombing was intended to include uninvolved civilians as collateral damage, but to what affect?

What seperates the King David Hotel Bombings from say, the Insurgents bombing of the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad, is that the targets where entirely the Officer Corp responsible for arresting 2,500 members of the Irgun and Haganah, shortly after the AGATHA operation had ended.

The difference between a terrorist act and the King David Hotel Bombing was first; the Irgun and Haganah actively evacuating civilians and warning the Hotel Staff several minutes before the bombings were to occur. Secondly, the intended targets where the British Military Government of Palestine, who were responsible for the Agatha raid and the arrests that followed it. Third, an act of terrorism intends to terrorify, which usually prescribes its acts of war against Civilians as opposed to military targets.

The King David Hotel Bombing, was not, by its own definition an act of terrorism because of those three supporting factors. My source makes this evident:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_Bombing

Despite its initial approval, repeated delays of the operation were requested by the Haganah in response to the changing political situation. The plan was finalised between Amichai Feglin(Gidi), chief of operations from the Irgun, and Itzhak Sadeh, commander of the Palmach. The details and the specific hour chosen for the attack were aimed at minimizing civilian casualties (the attack was planned before lunch time, so that there will be no people on the ground floor of the coffee shop which was the section to be destroyed. The reports of the Etzel have explicit precautions made so that the whole area will be evacuated). [2] The plan consisted of Irgun men, dressed as hotel employees and carrying the explosives which were concealed in milk cans, entering the building from a Cafe at the ground floor, and placing the charges below the Hotel Wing where the British institutions were located. Finally it was decided the attack would take place on July 22 at 11:00. The attack used approximately 350 kg of explosives spread across six charges. Due to a delay the operation started at 12:00, and a minor gunfight ensued with two British military men who became suspicious and tried to intervene. Etzel suffered two casualties as a result of this gunfight. [2] After placing the bombs, the Irgun men quickly escaped and detonated a small explosive in the street outside the hotel to keep passers-by away from the area. The Arab workers in the kitchen were told to flee and they did.[2]

A warning message was delivered to the telephone operator of the King David Hotel before the attack and also delivered to the French consulate and the Palestine Post newspaper. According to Irgun sources, the message read "I am speaking on behalf of the Hebrew underground. We have placed an explosive device in the hotel. Evacuate it at once - you have been warned."

 

[leib10]

Hey, Tarabisho the talking chicken is just as hilarious when he tells kids to commit a massacre with an AK47 - http://video.google.com/url?docid=5...Lq6Psg&usg=AL29H202B1FOEygi8Zhpt-o8B2yuCzz_zA

Yep, it's in the same league.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

the above is a good example of how you dont make sense ..how do you go from trying to explain "moused" (which was an obvious misspelling of the word mouse) to suggesting CNN is purposefully and knowingly sending out disinformation to suit a specific agenda?

The author did not misspell mouse, as "moused" it was intended. It is a phrase word to suggest something either has been silenced or played off as small, in some instances the phrase word can also act like a reverse personification giving a human the qualities or behavior of an inanimate object or animal.

Some people even use it in literature to characterize a persons behavior as timid:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/moused

Example: She moused about the house.
Example: He moused through the newspaper ...
Example: Hamas Jew-Killing Moused

I forget the exact term for it ... and for some reason I'm not sure if personification might actually apply.

Although, onto the next topic:

CNN's been known from some bias on a variety of topics, but not exclusively so. For something so controversially aimed at Israelis and Americans, preaching they're murder to children -- CNN did infact, "mouse" it.

I think you'll remember this video. Three years ago, CNN almost managed to portray this engagement against Insurgents planting a roadside bomb and preparing an RPG for an attack against Coalition Forces, into a potential and recorded atrocity of war.

Showing otherwise, the Insurgents are exchanging weapons and placing them at key area's in the field so when the convoy shows up, they'll have them ready for use.

Here's the full video that, once again, CNN refused to air in 2003:

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=87de4d7abd

So, like all media outlets, it is still capable of bending the truth when people need it the most.

 

[CptStern]

King David Hotel Bombing = terrorist? No, not nessecarly.
King David Hotel Bombing = Most accurate precision strike of the 20th century? No.

lol, yes or no kerberos is that too much to ask?

I'll take your first statement to mean you dont think the bombing of a hotel that killed 91 people an act of terrorism ...the second statement, well, that's like asking for the weather and getting sports news instead

The King David Hotel Bombing is one of those slippery slopes that can go either way.

only because you and people like you say so, the victems see it as an act of terrorism:

In July 2006, right-wing Israelis including former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former members of Irgun attended a 60th anniversary celebration of the bombing, which was organized by the Menachem Begin Centre. The British Ambassador in Tel Aviv and the Consul-General in Jerusalem dissented, saying "We do not think that it is right for an act of terrorism, which led to the loss of many lives, to be commemorated."

For example, you can say that simply because bystanders and hotel staff where killed in the bombing against British Army Personel, that the bombing was intended to include uninvolved civilians as collateral damage, but to what affect?

you talk in circles and never address any of the real points ..probably your way of ignoring the obvious truth

to what effect? ..oh I dont know ..terror? why else would you bomb a hotel full of civilians and civilian military personel? to force the british to leave? that sure as hell sounds like terrorism to me ..oh ok so you're going to say it was in retaliation for massive arrests? ya that seems reasonable ..kill 91 people so that your enemy will be compelled to release more like you ..ya that's an absolutely brilliant idea ..I wonder why Al Quada doesnt try this strategy

What seperates the King David Hotel Bombings from say, the Insurgents bombing of the Palestine Hotel in Baghdad, is that the targets where entirely the Officer Corp responsible for arresting 2,500 members of the Irgun and Haganah, shortly after the AGATHA operation had ended.

the targets of the USS cole bombing were entirely US military ..not an act of terrorism? the 1983 murders of hundreds of american and french troops in Beirut in a bombing attack at their barracks which also killed several civilians stationed at the base including children ..not a terrorist attack? the only rational explanation I can come up with as to why you wouldnt consider jewish terrorism terrorism but all other similiar acts terrorism is becausee you yourself are jewish, which precludes you from seeing what everyone else can clearly see ..this is why the palestinian/israeli issue wont be settled until every last one of you on both sides is dead ..being blind to the reality of your surroundings will lead to nothing except continual bloodshed with no end in sight ...and you'll probably bring us down with you ..so thank you and fcuk you in advance

The difference between a terrorist act and the King David Hotel Bombing was first;


1. the Irgun and Haganah actively evacuating civilians and warning the Hotel Staff several minutes before the bombings were to occur.

1. Spain's ETA always warns before a bombing ..they're terrorists
Irelands IRA often warned before a bombing ..considered terrorists by most
Osama Bin Laden often warns it's enemies that they'll pay a price if they dont concede on whatever issue is at hand ..considered terrorists by pretty much everybody

how does calling in advance absolve them from committing an act of terrorism? ..why didnt they call the british seeing as how you're saying they warned their target? ..the french consulate was not their target, the Palestine Post was not their target ...oh wait they did warn them:

Irgun representatives have always claimed that the warning was given well in advance so that adequate time was available to evacuate the hotel. Menachem Begin writes (p. 221, The Revolt, <1951> ed.) that the telephone message was delivered 25 - 27 minutes before the explosion. The British authorities denied for many years that there had been a warning at all, but the leaking of the internal police report on the bombing during the 1970s proved that a warning had indeed been received. However, the report stated that the warning was only just being delivered to the officer in charge as the bomb went off

ya real humanitarian of you ..terrorists dont warn their intended targets as the bomb is going off ..only freedom fighters do

Secondly, the intended targets where the British Military Government of Palestine, who were responsible for the Agatha raid and the arrests that followed it.

the targets of the USS cole bombing were entirely US military ..not an act of terrorism?

the 1983 murders of hundreds of american and french troops in Beirut in a bombing attack at their barracks which also killed several civilians stationed at the base including children ..not a terrorist attack?

Flight 77 slams into the Pentagon; a military complex ..not an act of terrorism?

you're a hypocrite


what is the difference? Irgun are jews and the others are not?

Third, an act of terrorism intends to terrorify, which usually prescribes its acts of war against Civilians as opposed to military targets.

the targets of the USS cole bombing were entirely US military ..not an act of terrorism?

the 1983 murders of hundreds of american and french troops in Beirut in a bombing attack at their barracks which also killed several civilians stationed at the base including children ..not a terrorist attack?

Flight 77 slams into the Pentagon; a military complex ..not an act of terrorism?

you're a hypocrite

what is the difference? Irgun are jews and the others are not?

The author did not misspell mouse, as "moused" it was intended. It is a phrase word to suggest something either has been silenced or played off as small, in some instances the phrase word can also act like a reverse personification giving a human the qualities or behavior of an inanimate object or animal.

Some people even use it in literature to characterize a persons behavior as timid:

Example: She moused about the house.
Example: He moused through the newspaper ...
Example: Hamas Jew-Killing Moused

I forget the exact term for it ... and for some reason I'm not sure if personification might actually apply.

no it does not ..you're not trying to school me in the english language are you? you of all people ..that's rich

oh btw you're quite good at making yourself look like a fool ..especially when you go to such lengths to explain a word in such detail when you're obviously wrong ..your definition of Moused does not apply to what you're saying it does:

moused:

1. To hunt mice.
2. To search furtively for something; prowl.

please explain how this title falls under that definition?

"CNN Refuses to Play the Truth: Hamas Jew-Killing Moused"

that makes zero sense

Some people even use it in literature to characterize a persons behavior as timid

wrong the word is "mousy" NOT "moused"

Mousy:

1. Resembling a mouse, especially:
a. Having a drab, pale brown color: mousy hair.
b. Having small sharp features: a mousy face.
c. Quiet; timid; shy


and even when you're completely wrong, you're spectacularily wrong:

Some people even use it in literature to characterize a persons behavior as timid:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/moused

Example: She moused about the house.
Example: He moused through the newspaper ...
Example: Hamas Jew-Killing Moused

the first two examples are correct in that they fit the sentence but not the way you think it does ..the third is completely wrong EVEN if you used your definition: behavior as timid ..that's what personification means: a PERSON personifies a particular emotion

tip: dont translate your language into english when you speak/write ..it doesnt always make sense in english

Although, onto the next topic:

CNN's been known from some bias on a variety of topics, but not exclusively so. For something so controversially aimed at Israelis and Americans, preaching they're murder to children -- CNN did infact, "mouse" it.

you are using "mouse" incorrectly

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/mouse

 

[K e r b e r o s]

yes or no kerberos is that too much to ask?

Not really. And my answer is still leaning towards, "No" but I don't want to be premature in deciding ultimately what it really was. If there's was more information available that might otherwise condemn the operation, then I'd need to see it for a final decision.

Until that time, I've not seen many sources that have said otherwise OR would lead one to believe it was the intent of the Irgun or Haganah to "terrorize" civilians, as the term "terrorism" would modernly apply.

The British Ambassador in Tel Aviv and the Consul-General in Jerusalem dissented, saying "We do not think that it is right for an act of terrorism, which led to the loss of many lives, to be commemorated."

So two people have a differing opinion each coming from opposite throws of the international community -- thats what I get here. If they believe it was a terrorist atrocity then it needs to be cited from them and anyone else for that matter, where the Irgun and Haganah intended it to be an attack against Civilians.

I've already provided you this article snippet from wikipedia that might otherwise rule out the possibility of this being a terrorist attack, although an attack nonetheless that was crudely carried out with the cost of added tens of civilians.

Despite its initial approval, repeated delays of the operation were requested by the Haganah in response to the changing political situation. The plan was finalised between Amichai Feglin(Gidi), chief of operations from the Irgun, and Itzhak Sadeh, commander of the Palmach. The details and the specific hour chosen for the attack were aimed at minimizing civilian casualties (the attack was planned before lunch time, so that there will be no people on the ground floor of the coffee shop which was the section to be destroyed. The reports of the Etzel have explicit precautions made so that the whole area will be evacuated). [2] The plan consisted of Irgun men, dressed as hotel employees and carrying the explosives which were concealed in milk cans, entering the building from a Cafe at the ground floor, and placing the charges below the Hotel Wing where the British institutions were located. Finally it was decided the attack would take place on July 22 at 11:00. The attack used approximately 350 kg of explosives spread across six charges. Due to a delay the operation started at 12:00, and a minor gunfight ensued with two British military men who became suspicious and tried to intervene. Etzel suffered two casualties as a result of this gunfight. [2] After placing the bombs, the Irgun men quickly escaped and detonated a small explosive in the street outside the hotel to keep passers-by away from the area. The Arab workers in the kitchen were told to flee and they did.[2]

A warning message was delivered to the telephone operator of the King David Hotel before the attack and also delivered to the French consulate and the Palestine Post newspaper. According to Irgun sources, the message read "I am speaking on behalf of the Hebrew underground. We have placed an explosive device in the hotel. Evacuate it at once - you have been warned."

The Irgun and Haganah could risk too much alarm, otherwise the dossiers citing Haganah and Irgun membership, leadership, munitions and supply logistics would've been evacuated along with the British Army Deserters and Service Members who commenced Agatha; thereby allowing your opposing force crucial control of reprimanded data containing every piece of information reguarding your resistance movement.

The translation, is that the Israeli War of Independence might have failed if this information was not bombed but brought to the attention of British Military and Political personel overseas.

Warning everyone meant that the evacuation order would've eventually found itself in the ears of the Agatha leadership, and you would'nt want that to escape only to further sabotage your movement for forming an independent state.

 

[CptStern]

Not really. And my answer is still leaning towards, "No" but I don't want to be premature in deciding ultimately what it really was. If there's was more information available that might otherwise condemn the operation, then I'd need to see it for a final decision.

Until that time, I've not seen many sources that have said otherwise OR would lead one to believe it was the intent of the Irgun or Haganah to "terrorize" civilians, as the term "terrorism" would modernly apply.



So two people have a differing opinion each coming from opposite throws of the international community -- thats what I get here. If they believe it was a terrorist atrocity then it needs to be cited from them and anyone else for that matter, where the Irgun and Haganah intended it to be an attack against Civilians.

I've already provided you this article snippet from wikipedia that might otherwise rule out the possibility of this being a terrorist attack, although an attack nonetheless that was crudely carried out with the cost of added tens of civilians.



The Irgun and Haganah could risk too much alarm, otherwise the dossiers citing Haganah and Irgun membership, leadership, munitions and supply logistics would've been evacuated along with the British Army Deserters and Service Members who commenced Agatha; thereby allowing your opposing force crucial control of reprimanded data containing every piece of information reguarding your resistance movement.

The translation, is that the Israeli War of Independence might have failed if this information was not bombed but brought to the attention of British Military and Political personel overseas.

Warning everyone meant that the evacuation order would've eventually found itself in the ears of the Agatha leadership, and you would'nt want that to escape only to further sabotage your movement for forming an independent state.

so it all boils down to that as long as the terrorists intentions are honorable (which you define as attacking an occupier but only if the people resisting are jewish; no one else) it's not terrorism ....riiiight that makes sense ..


"suicide bomber kills a handful of jewish military and some innocent bystanders ..are they jewish? no? ...must be terrorists then"


you're suffering from belief perseverance:

Belief perseverance

* Developed beliefs persist in the face of contradictory evidence.

* Explanations we develop to explain our experiences become fixed beliefs, even when they are shown to be based on wrong evidence

http://www.psychology.iastate.edu/faculty/caa/abstracts/1979-1984/80ALR.html

 

[K e r b e r o s]

so it all boils down to that as long as the terrorists intentions are honorable (which you define as attacking an occupier but only if the people resisting are jewish; no one else)

No. What it all boils down to is raw confusion and ultimately speculation. To summarize everything, I don't have enough information yet to condemn the operation because historical sources are almost always backing the Irgun and Haganah statements as true, where the civilians were being evacuated and the operations intent focused on British Army Deserters.

If there was enough collaberative information brought together that might give us a better picture, then I'm not prematurely deciding that the King David Hotel Bombing was an act of terrorism, but almost certainly was a clumsily carried out act of war. Should Israel answer for the deaths of those civilians?

Sure. Why has'nt it apologized? For something so crucial in their countries developement, the least they could've done is apologize for the deaths, provide a form or method of legal compensation, and work together with they're military branches and personel to ensure future operations are carried out only when the targets are away from uninvolved civilians.

Another option would be to simply thank the victims families for they're sons and daughters, "sacrifice" ... however crude and unsympathetic that last option would be.

Unless I'm guessing this wrong, has Israel apologized?

 

[CptStern]

No. What it all boils down to is raw confusion and ultimately speculation.

yes because there's more than meets the eye when an extremeist group puts a bomb into a civilan complex ..I mean we should investigate the bombing in iraq that killed 61 people today because some of them were collaborators and obviously the freedom fighters were trying to take them out but the civilians just got in the way ..so sad ..it's sad that 61 people were killed in a bombing blast but those loveable Fighters For Truth Justice and Liberty MUST be honoured for what they do ...just like the Irgun, those noble warriors only killed 91 IINOCENT bystanders ..for shame, they should have killed more, oy gevalt what chuzpah those english have

To summarize everything, I don't have enough information

why? you have far far far less information in this particular thread about US fighter pilots dropping bombs on "suspected" terrorists ..I mean it was a simple matter to condemn them to a firey death yet a hotel bombing from over 50 years ago that has been analysed to death is much harder to condemn? you're a hypocrite ..it's obvious the only thing in your mind that differentiates either side is whether or not they're jews ..you are exactly what your enemy is

yet to condemn the operation because historical sources are almost always backing the Irgun and Haganah statements as true, where the civilians were being evacuated and the operations intent focused on British Army Deserters.

bullshit I've proven there was no time for evacuation ..oh and history is written by the victors ..the British see it as an act of terrorism ..anyone within their right mind sees it as an act of terrorism ..in fact the ONLY groups who dont think it was an act of terrorism are the terrorists themselves and their idiotic supporters

If there was enough collaberative information brought together that might give us a better picture

spare me your hypocrisy Kerberos ..the ONLY reason why you do not condemn this act of terrorism is because it was commited by people like you ...remember how quick you were to sentence these people to a quick death based on nothing more than vague shapes that may or may not have been weapons ..you are a hypoctrite and a good example as to why israel will be burnt to the ground ..it's inevitable; when there are people on both sides who are so unyeilding, so unreasonable that they would excuse terrorism because it supports THEIR ideology ..if you're a hypocrite who supports the means to an end no matter how vile then what are the front lines jews/palestinians like? if even the moderates are extremists what chances do you have? ..you peoiple deserve each other

then I'm not prematurely deciding that the King David Hotel Bombing was an act of terrorism, but almost certainly was a clumsily carried out act of war. Should Israel answer for the deaths of those civilians?

yes they should. those involved should have been tried for acts of terrorism

Sure. Why has'nt it apologized?

why hasnt the US apologised for falsely invading iraq? what does that prove?

For something so crucial in their countries developement, the least they could've done is apologize for the deaths, provide a form or method of legal compensation, and work together with they're military branches and personel to ensure future operations are carried out only when the targets are away from uninvolved civilians.

do they compensate the families of innocents they kill when they attack a refugee camp? have they compensatd the victems of chemical attacks? ..kerberos, not apologising doesnt make them innocent, why do I have to explain this? how many murderers are condemned to death even though they apologise to their victems families?

Another option would be to simply thank the victims families for they're sons and daughters, "sacrifice" ... however crude and unsympathetic that last option would be.

ya I'm sure the family would appreciate it ...I wonder how popular it would be if germans sent notes of condolences to the victems of the holocaust

"thanks for dying, your sacrifice helped bring about the end of Hitler"

Unless I'm guessing this wrong, has Israel apologized?

nope in fact the opposite is true: they celebrate it

In July 2006, right-wing Israelis including former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former members of Irgun attended a 60th anniversary celebration of the bombing, which was organized by the Menachem Begin Centre. The British Ambassador in Tel Aviv and the Consul-General in Jerusalem dissented, saying "We do not think that it is right for an act of terrorism, which led to the loss of many lives, to be commemorated."

"probably because the jews are a sick and depraved people"