HRW Confirms Gaza Terrorists Killed Gaza Boy Shown in Iconic Photo of Egypt’s PM

Hardly. However it looks pretty identical to what you spout no surprise there!

The judgement passed by Jesus on the Jews marks the Jewish people for all time:
"Ye are of your father the devil! He was a murderer from the beginning."

source

Julius Streicher had a long list of libel cases brought against him by Jews and others in the years prior to the Nazi period. Which individual Muslims have had cause to bring such cases against Robert Spencer? Jihad Watch is mainly a blog over Muslim based terrorism which does not find its equivalent in Jewish terrorism in Julius Streicher's Der Stürmer newspaper.

 

Here's an excerpt from a beautifully written piece by Terrell AronSpeer:

The rockets used by Hamas are supplied by Iran and usually launched from school yards, market places, hospital roof tops and Islamic Mosques. This is deliberate on the part of Hamas to draw fire to innocents; to use their own citizens as cannon fodder. At some level of operation, Israel must act to defend her citizens. As soon as she does so, an endless stream of “innocent victims” is paraded before the world press. “Israel is killing innocents,” they cry. The “innocents” should have turned out these terrorists a long time ago. There are no innocents in Gaza, and there has not been for generations.

http://www.teaparty911.com/blog/hamas-and-white-house-use-similar-tactics/

Some people do have a knack for crossing T's and dotting I's, and Terrell is one of them. This short passage says it all.

 

Your thread title was a deception. Why should anybody believe any following post ?

 

You don't believe, "The rockets used by Hamas are supplied by Iran and usually launched from school yards, market places, hospital roof tops and Islamic Mosques"? Of course you do

 

Spencer himself is a racist, with ties to odious racist groups, in the US, and across Europe.

It would follow that his site is a reflection of himself, which it is.

 

As I said- Your thread title was a deception. Why should anybody believe any following post ?

 

And flamebait, by definition...

 

[video=youtube;uGwtG8nVpUU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGwtG8nVpUU[/video]

 

Yes.

Posting the same hate vid twice on two threads, proves what?

 

Terrell is not telling the truth. Hamas has used GRAD rockets supplied by Iran (an old Soviet system) but they are not even 20% of the rockets fired off by Hamas in 2012; the rest are Qassams, a generic term for homemade rockets named after the most popular model.

Similarily, the large majority (at least 3 out of 4) of rockets and mortars are fired off from patches of waste ground and fields just past the urban area of Gaza. The rest were indeed fired off from schoolyards, market places, hospital rooftops and mosque courtyards.

Finally, the characterization of all Gazans as terrorists for generations is a dead giveaway. The large majority of Gazans are Naqab refugees and their descendants. Just being on the losing side of an ethic/religious war and having your land taken from you does not make you a terrorist. By the same logic all Israelis are terrorists for stealing the land and for killing several times as many Gazan civilians as Gazans have killed Israeli civilians.

All Isrealis have not been terrorists for generations. The same should be said for the residents of Gaza.

 

Obviously entire ethnicities cannot be called terrorists. Just like entire groups cannot be called murderers. It is always an action accountable by the individual. BTW stealing land and losing land is not what charcaterises a terrorist - a terrorist intentionally targets civilians.

 

Occupation = terrorism. Occupiers are terrorists.

 

It is a redundant term, that it too one dimensional to be reliable, imo. The SS considered the Jews of the Warsaw ghetto to be terrorists. You may not consider them so, I do not, but that is not the point, the point is that the Gov and law of the day, they did.

That is one of the reasons I don't just drop to my knees, over laws and Gov's of the day. They literally write the definitions of such things, handily remembering to make themselves exempt from accountability.

Israel itself was founded by way of Jewish terrorism, against the native population of course, but also against the British who, against all reasonable logic and reason, were really the only country in Europe that stood up to the NS. Everyone else either folded to them, surrendered, remained neutral, etc. Yes, the US came in, years after the fact, but it was only Britian that led the way, and it was only Britain that did not surrender, along with Malta. Not saying there were not pockets of resistance in other European counties.

Then there is state terrorism and non state terrorism. The only real difference is that the former tend to kill far more than the latter, indeed, it is sometimes the former that lends itself to the latter being spawned.

 

Websters defines terrorism as such:


terrorism
noun (Concise Encyclopedia)



Systematic use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population and thereby to bring about a particular political objective. It has been used throughout history by political organizations of both the left and the right, by nationalist and ethnic groups, and by revolutionaries. Although usually thought of as a means of destabilizing or overthrowing existing political institutions, terror also has been employed by governments against their own people to suppress dissent; examples include the reigns of certain Roman emperors, the French Revolution (see Reign of Terror), Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union under Stalin, and Argentina during the “dirty war” of the 1970s. Terrorism's impact has been magnified by the deadliness and technological sophistication of modern-day weapons and the capability of the media to disseminate news of such attacks instantaneously throughout the world. The deadliest terrorist attack ever occurred in the United States on Sept. 11, 2001 (see September 11 attacks), when members of al-Qaeda terrorist network hijacked four commercial airplanes and crashed two of them into the twin towers of the World Trade Center complex in New York City and one into the Pentagon building near Washington, D.C.; the fourth plane crashed near Pittsburgh, Pa. The crashes resulted in the collapse of much of the World Trade Center complex, the destruction of part of the southwest side of the Pentagon, and the deaths of some 3,000 people.


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/terrorism

Occupation is not provided as an example.

 

I have only read references to Widerstand and Aufstand, which translate into resistance. Do you have any references?

 

Okay, if you're going to quote mine me, and miss my actual point, fine, you do that.

 

Quote mine me? What does that mean? You made a contention and I am wondering where you get that.
If what I quoted from your post was not your point, what was?

 

Occupation (which necessarily involves the attainment of a political objective through fear and violence), is, by logical extension, terrorism. The fact that it is not specifically mentioned as an example above, is redundant.

 

Terrorism is killing people and blowing things up. Stop stretching the truth.

 

Quote mine is when you select only one small part, of a much larger quote, which then causes the original quote to lose it's true and correct context.

 

Like I say, 'terrorism' is too fluid a term, as it could include those that bombed Dresden, or the US deploying the A bomb, so, if one wants to stick with it, they must be fair also, and speak of state terrorism, esp if done by their own country.

I think we all have an extra duty to have the guts to call out state terrorism, in our own countries. I believe it makes one a better citizen, and a better national as well. I for one cannot find myself able to lecture anyone about not using violence, for as long as the Gov's here mandate violence, from the other side of their mouth. One cannot be okay, and the other not. That is just blind bias.

If you lie your people into a conflict you have no logical business being in, that is treason, no less, in my eyes.

Part of the reason I have no faith in this sham of a system, is that in an honest system, not only would it be treason, but the arrest and trial of Tony Blair, and his entire cabinet, would have been fast tracked. No messing around, hiding behind this and that. Bring them all to account, let the best prosectors we have loose on them, and if guilty, put them away for life.

It would restore everyone's faith in justice for all, and it would send a message out to politicians - you should fear us, we do not fear you.

 

Just applying Liebe's definition.There are others that are similar like the US State Department, for example.Would you like me to quote it for you? By their OWN defintion, the US and Israeli governments' are terrorists.

 

If a terrorist is someone that targets civilains, would I be a terrorist, if I went out of my way to detonate only a building, that was done safely, and meant as a gesture. Ie; If they were satisfied that there was no intent to injure or harm people, just the structure?

 

Like I've said many times before, the term terrorism is used as a propaganda term applicable to the "other". It's essentially meaningless, since, by the US's OWN definition, it itself is a terrorist state, as are all states who initiate wars of aggression. It's "war" when we kill but "terrorism" when the "other" kill. In other words, "War is the terrorism of the rich and powerful, and terrorism is the war of the poor and powerless".

 

The "intentional targetting" bit is a misnomer since the carpet bombing of densely populated areas INEVITABLY results in the deaths of civilans.