Executie deliberata a 30 de civili in Gaza!

9 Jan, 2009  gaza

38 Comentarii pana acum»

1. Eugen said

   am January 9 2009 @ 6:33 pm

   Sa stii ca este mai simplu asa, sau cu o atomica, cu o bomba cu hidrogen…

2. Tica said

   am January 9 2009 @ 6:35 pm

   Sa stii tu ca erau mai subtili nazistii;
   Adica duceau evreii la spalat, ca deh nu pot sa ajunga in fata lui Sf. Petru murdari, si apoi, pe muzica clasica, le dadea gaz, frumos fara durere..
   Lasand laoparte mistoul, astea deja sunt crime odioase , cu care un soldat nu ar trebui sa se manjeasca

3. VIOREL URBAN said

   am January 9 2009 @ 7:23 pm

   http://urbanviorel.ro/2008/12/30/baia-de-sange-din-gaza-oameni-nevinovati-mor-suntem-tinuti-fara-toata-paleta-de-informatii/

4. Tizul said

   am January 10 2009 @ 12:52 am

   Fara suparare, stirea este varianta araba a incidentului:

   http://www.google.ro/search?as_q=According+to+several+testimonies+on+4+January+Israeli+foot+soldiers+evacuated+approximately&hl=ro&rlz=1B3GGGL_enRO284RO284&num=10&btnG=C%C4%83utare+Google&as_epq=According+to+several+testimonies%2C+on+4+January+Israeli+foot+soldiers+evacuated+approximately&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=&cr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=&as_rights=

5. Lester the jester said

   am January 10 2009 @ 12:54 am

   daca am inteles bine din momentul cind ai declarat pe cineva terorist totul este permis …

   Avec 126,3 millions d’euros, la France figure en tête de liste pour 2007, suivie par l’Allemagne (28,4 millions d’euros), la Roumanie (16,7 millions), le Royaume-Uni (6,8 millions) et la Belgique. Seize Etats membres de l’Union européenne ont accordé cette année-là des licences d’exportation d’armes vers Israël.

   http://www.rtbf.be/info/la-belgique-a-exporte-pour-54-m-deuros-darmes-vers-israel-en-2007-70081

6. Tizul said

   am January 10 2009 @ 12:56 am

   Asta este stirea prezentata de europeni:

   http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1110212/Israel-faces-UN-war-crimes-probe-dozens-civilians-moved-safe-house–bombed-airstrike-24-hours-later.html

7. Tizul said

   am January 10 2009 @ 12:57 am

   Oricum, tot criminali raman, iar la terorism nu se raspunde asa, daca vrei sa anihilezi terorismul.

8. Tizul said

   am January 10 2009 @ 1:00 am

   Varianta CNN:

   http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1110212/Israel-faces-UN-war-crimes-probe-dozens-civilians-moved-safe-house–bombed-airstrike-24-hours-later.html

9. cbabeanu said

   am January 10 2009 @ 8:57 am

   Daca Dl Orban citeaza doar Aljazerra, de ce nu trece mai bine la mahomedanism ? Ar fi in acord cu opiniile sale politice pro-islamice!

10. relu said

    am January 10 2009 @ 9:51 am

    cbabeanu , auzi , ia cioc mic si stai pe spate.

11. Parmalat said

    am January 10 2009 @ 12:00 pm

    Pai nu e prima data cand Israelul face din astea. Ma rog, indiferent ce s-ar intampla – sa se rezolve situatia si sa fie pace vreo 10 ani!

12. Bebe said

    am January 10 2009 @ 2:26 pm

    Din punctul meu de vedere, atata timp cat nu lasi rahatul sa se usuce si-l amesteci, in zona lui tot va puti, a rahat – desigur! Daca cineva iti ofera pacea si tu continui sa-l futi cu rachete, atentate, copii de 14 ani cu centuri de dinamita legate de ei si cu alte imbecilitati musulmane, nu cred ca are rost sa mai ceri indurare, clementa, etc. de la acela! Nu-i iubesc nici pe jidani, nici pe jairi, pot doar sa convietuiesc cu ei, pot sa-i accept. Dar in momentul in care acestea de mai sus sau terminat, pot sa fiu si hitler si stalin la un loc, fara sa-mi pese ca sunt “copii, femei si batrani”. Aceeia de care povesteste articolul, nu pot fi soldati, dar putem fi siguri ca “civilii” respectivi nu aveau cate o grenada legata de coaie? Oricum tot ce se cheama “soldat” este un criminal, mai mult sau mai putin “legal”.

13. Costi costitza said

    am January 10 2009 @ 2:48 pm

    Daca masacrarea evreilor de catre nazisti s-a numit holocaust , atunci masacrarea palestinienilor de catre evrei cum se numeste ?

14. bo said

    am January 10 2009 @ 5:11 pm

    trebui sa intelegem ca lucrurile nu sunt scapate de sub control decat pentru victime, actiuniile se desfasoara conform planului, discursul lui Kissinger vis-a-vis de NWO nu este intamplator…ofera o alternativa clara spre care suntem “manati”.
    Cetatenii multor tari renunta la libertatiile personale pentru “siguranta” fata de un agresor fantoma.(vezi “lovitura de stat” din ‘89 – “teroristi” foloseau armament israelian – am avut ocazia sa vad o astfel de arma “gasita” la revolutie ce si acum rugineste intr-o lada).
    Dreptul civililor de a purta arme in America a fost garantat exact pentru o oferii poporului puterea de a rasturna o conducere care ajunge sa nu le mai reprezinte nevoile. Nu degeaba Kissinger dar si alte voci Buildenberg doresc dezarmarea civililor. Asta este ordinea fireasca a lucrurilor.

15. Sergiu said

    am January 10 2009 @ 5:42 pm

    D.ule Urban Iulian dv sinteti numai de o parte sinteti pro musulman- palestinian , nu ati avut posibilitatea de a simti cu copilul si sotia cum este sa intri in adapost subteran sau in alt adapost , indiferent la ce ora si asta de multe ori indiferent daca e zi sau noapte/ cald sau rece si ploua / ce simte sotia ? iar copilul care i-si face nevoile in ciloti de frica /si sotia vrea sa-ti plece din zona sa-si apere copilul dar D.ule unde ?In partea de nord nu ? dar unde acolo Bombardeaza HIZBOLLAH si aia ce sint Romanii ? Nu ! D.le Ulian aia sint Musulmani din Liban care au musulmanizat libanul si au supus Crestini arabi in Tara lor . Libanul care a fost o Data Majoritar Crestin a primit refugiati arabi palestinieni(de mila Crestineasca) si acum ce ? sau inarmat pin-in dinti incepaind din acele tabere de refugiati – au supus crestini si I-au musulmanizat tara ! Pe acest drum va pleca si Urmatoarile tari care au comunitati marii de musulmanii ca : Spania , Franta , Germania .Italia — Iar Israelul ce sa Faca in sud nu e Bine ca Trage Hamas din Gaza – In Nord nu e Bine ca trage Hizbulah din Liban -Atunci sa stea Sotia si copii in mijlocul Tarii – Dar nici acolo Nu e bine ca acolo din CalKilia Trag musulmani lui Abu Mazen ! Mijlocul are o latime de 20 km adica Bucuresti- Buftea // Tot Israelul Face 2 Judete Romanesti – unde Doritii sa se refugizee locuitori Israelului In Mare ?????

16. Felicia Antip said

    am January 10 2009 @ 6:08 pm

    Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain “signatures” by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
    The Washington Post:
    Endgame in Gaza

    By Charles Krauthammer
    Friday, January 9, 2009; Page A17

    Israel’s leaders have purposely obscured their war aims in Gaza. But there are only two possible endgames: (A) a Lebanon-like cessation of hostilities to be supervised by international observers, or (B) the disintegration of Hamas rule in Gaza.
    Under tremendous international pressure — including from an increasingly wobbly U.S. State Department — the government of Ehud Olmert has begun hinting that it is receptive to a French-Egyptian cease-fire plan, essentially acquiescing to Endgame A.
    That would be a terrible mistake.

    It would fail on its own terms. It would have the same elements as the phony peace in Lebanon: an international force that abjures any meaningful use of force, an arms embargo under which arms will most assuredly flood in, and a cessation of hostilities until the terrorist side is rearmed and ready to initiate the next round of hostilities.
    ad_icon

    The U.N.-mandated disarmament of Hezbollah in Lebanon is a well-known farce. Not only have foreign forces not stopped Hezbollah’s massive rearmament, their very presence makes it impossible for Israel to take any preventive military action, lest it accidentally hit a blue-helmeted Belgian crossing guard.

    The “international community” is now pushing very hard for a Gaza replay of that charade. Does anyone imagine that international monitors will risk their lives to prevent weapons smuggling? To arrest terrorists? To engage in shootouts with rocket-launching teams attacking Israeli civilians across the Gaza border?

    Of course not. Weapons will continue to be smuggled. Deeper and more secure fortifications will be built for the next round. Mosques, schools and hospitals will again be used for weapons storage and terrorist safe havens. Do you think French “peacekeepers” are going to raid them?

    Such a deal would buy Israel maybe a couple of years. After which, Round Two — with Hamas rockets by then killing civilians in Tel Aviv, making Ben-Gurion airport unusable and reaching Israel’s nuclear reactor in Dimona.

    Which is why the only acceptable outcome of this war, both for Israel and for the civilized world, is Endgame B: the disintegration of Hamas rule. It is already underway.

    This is not about killing every last Hamas gunman. Not possible, not necessary. Regimes rule not by physically overpowering every person in their domain but by getting the majority to accept their authority. That is what sustains Hamas, and that is what is now under massive assault.

    Hamas’s leadership is not only seriously degraded but openly humiliated. The great warriors urging others to martyrdom are cowering underground, almost entirely incommunicado. Demonstrably unable to protect their own people, they beg for outside help, receiving in return nothing but words from their Arab and Iranian brothers. And who in fact is providing the corridors for humanitarian assistance to Palestinian civilians? Israel.

    In the first four minutes of this war, the Israeli Air Force destroyed 50 targets, taking down practically every instrument and symbol of Hamas rule. Gaza’s Potemkin leaders were marginalized and rendered helpless, leaving their people to fend for themselves. At such moments, regimes are extremely vulnerable to forfeiting what the Chinese call the mandate of heaven, the sense of legitimacy that undergirds all forms of governance.

    The fall of Hamas rule in Gaza is within reach, but only if Israel does not cave in to pressure to stop now. Overthrowing Hamas would not require a permanent Israeli reoccupation. A transitional international force would be brought in to immediately make way for the return of the Palestinian Authority, the legitimate government whose forces would be far less squeamish than the Europeans in establishing order in Gaza.

    The disintegration of Hamas rule in Gaza would be a devastating blow to Palestinian rejectionists, who since the Hamas takeover of Gaza have been the ascendant “strong horse” in Palestinian politics. It would be a devastating blow to Iran as patron of radical Islamist movements throughout the region, particularly after the defeat and marginalization of Iran’s Sadrist client in Iraq. It would encourage the moderate Arab states to continue their U.S.-allied confrontation of Iran and its proxies. And it would demonstrate Israel’s irreplaceable strategic value to the United States in curbing and containing Iran’s regional ambitions.

    Olmert had such an opportunity in Lebanon. He blew it. He now has a rare second chance. The one-step-from-madness gangster theocracy in Gaza — just four days before the fighting, the Hamas parliament passed a sharia criminal code, legalizing, among other niceties, crucifixion — is teetering on the brink. It can be brought down, but only if Israel is prepared — and allowed — to complete the real mission of this war. For the Bush State Department, in its last significant act, to prevent that with the premature imposition of a cease-fire would be not just self-defeating but shameful.

17. Felicia Antip said

    am January 10 2009 @ 6:45 pm

    Declaratie
    a Societ?tii Culturale Româno-Israeliene
    privind situatia din Gaza

    Având In vedere interventia armatei israeliene In Gaza, ecoul international si nevoia de corectitudine a informatiilor, Societatea Cultural? Româno-Israelian? resimte ca o datorie intelectual?, moral? si uman? s? declare:
    a) In cadrul eforturilor Israelului si ale comunit?tii mondiale de a se asigura palestinienilor spatiul unui viitor stat, fâsia Gaza a fost trecut? sub control palestinian de c?tre guvernul Ariel Sharon. In locul unei asteptate dezvolt?ri a fâsiei Gaza, In beneficiul locuitorilor s?i, am asistat In ultimii ani la instalarea la putere, inclusiv prin violent?, a organizatiei teroriste Hamas, care a atacat o alt? organizatie palestinian?, Al Fatah.
    b) ulterior, Hamas s-a angajat In atacarea statului Israel, lansând rachete asupra localit?tilor statului evreu. Dreptul statului Israel la existent? nestânjenit?, la ap?rarea propriilor cet?teni, nu se poate l?sa si nu trebuie l?sat la Indemâna grupurilor care au ca profesie terorismul.
    c) In aceast? situatie, armata Israelului a intervenit In Gaza, Incepând cu 27 decembrie 2008, pentru a distruge infrastructura de atacuri a teroristilor Hamas-ului. Asa cum au subliniat, cu deplin? responsabilitate, conduc?torii S.U.A., Germaniei, Frantei si ai multor altor t?ri, ceea ce face Hamas-ul este iresponsabil si impardonabil si nu poate stârni, pentru o minte lucid? si un om responsabil, decât repulsie si revolt?.
    d) r?zboaiele sunt regretabile, iar pierderile de vieti omenesti nu pot fi compensate, dar terorismul a devenit un pericol major pentru oameni, iar tolerarea terorismului ast?zi nu face decât s? preg?teasc? r?zboaiele si mortii viitorului.
    e) indiferent de sentimentele provocate de pierderile de vieti omenesti si de efectele r?zboiului, este rational si responsabil ca cei care se pronunt? s? ia In seam? cauzele care au dus la r?zboi si s? stabileasc? cu acuratete cine poart? vinov?tia.
    f) In mod evident, terorismul nu este solutie nic?ieri, nici In Orientul Apropiat, iar statele existente, recunoscute de comunitatea mondial?, trebuie s? se poat? bucura de securitate nestirbit?. Contributia cultural? a popoarelor se cuvine pretuit? si respectat?, Israelul si mostenirea cultural? a statului evreu fiind unul dintre bunurile cele mai de pret ale omenirii. Soarta Israelului este r?spunderea evreilor, dar si a lumii iudeo-crestine si a crestin?t?tii, a umanit?tii lumii civilizate.

    Societatea Cultural? Româno-Israelian?
    Cluj-Napoca

18. Felicia Antip said

    am January 10 2009 @ 6:51 pm

    O analiza araba
    Arab regimes secretly rooting for Israel?

    By Kamran Bokhari and Reva Bhalla of Stratfor

    http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Israel is now in the 13th day of carrying out Operation Cast Lead against the Palestinian Islamist movement Hamas in the Gaza Strip, where Hamas has been the de facto ruler ever since it seized control of the territory in a June 2007 coup. The Israeli campaign, whose primary military aim is to neutralize Hamas’ ability to carry out rocket attacks against Israel, has led to the reported deaths of more than 560 Palestinians; the number of wounded is approaching the 3,000 mark.

    The reaction from the Arab world has been mixed. On the one hand, a look at the so-called Arab street will reveal an angry scene of chanting protesters, burning flags and embassy attacks in protest of Israel’s actions. The principal Arab regimes, however, have either kept quiet or publicly condemned Hamas for the crisis — while privately often expressing their support for Israel’s bid to weaken the radical Palestinian group.

    Despite the much-hyped Arab nationalist solidarity often cited in the name of Palestine, most Arab regimes actually have little love for the Palestinians. While these countries like keeping the Palestinian issue alive for domestic consumption and as a tool to pressure Israel and the West when the need arises, in actuality, they tend to view Palestinian refugees — and more Palestinian radical groups like Hamas — as a threat to the stability of their regimes.

    One such Arab country is Saudi Arabia. Given its financial power and its shared religious underpinnings with Hamas, Riyadh traditionally has backed the radical Palestinian group. The kingdom backed a variety of Islamist political forces during the 1960s and 1970s in a bid to undercut secular Nasserite Arab nationalist forces, which threatened Saudi Arabia’s regional status. But 9/11, which stemmed in part from Saudi support for the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan, opened Riyadh’s eyes to the danger of supporting militant Islamism.

    Thus, while Saudi Arabia continued to support many of the same Palestinian groups, it also started whistling a more moderate tune in its domestic and foreign policies. As part of this moderate drive, in 2002 King Abdullah offered Israel a comprehensive peace treaty whereby Arab states would normalize ties with the Jewish state in exchange for an Israeli withdrawal to its 1967 borders. Though Israel rejected the offer, the proposal itself clearly conflicted with Hamas’ manifesto, which calls for Israel’s destruction. The post-9/11 world also created new problems for one of Hamas’ sources of regular funding — wealthy Gulf Arabs — who grew increasingly wary of turning up on the radars of Western security and intelligence agencies as fund transfers from the Gulf came under closer scrutiny.

    Meanwhile, Egypt, which regularly mediates Hamas-Israel and Hamas-Fatah matters, thus far has been the most vocal in its opposition to Hamas during the latest Israeli military offensive. Cairo has even gone as far as blaming Hamas for provoking the conflict. Though Egypt’s stance has earned it a number of attacks on its embassies in the Arab world and condemnations in major Arab editorial pages, Cairo has a core strategic interest in ensuring that Hamas remains boxed in. The secular government of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak is already preparing for a shaky leadership transition, which is bound to be exploited by the country’s largest opposition movement, the Muslim Brotherhood (MB).

    The MB, from which Hamas emerged, maintains links with the Hamas leadership. Egypt’s powerful security apparatus has kept the MB in check, but the Egyptian group has steadily built up support among Egypt’s lower and middle classes, which have grown disillusioned with the soaring rate of unemployment and lack of economic prospects in Egypt. The sight of Muslim Brotherhood activists leading protests in Egypt in the name of Hamas is thus quite disconcerting for the Mubarak regime. The Egyptians also are fearful that Gaza could become a haven for Salafist jihadist groups that could collaborate with Egypt’s own jihadist node the longer Gaza remains in disarray under Hamas rule.

    Of the Arab states, Jordan has the most to lose from a group like Hamas. More than three-fourths of the Hashemite monarchy’s people claim Palestinian origins. The kingdom itself is a weak, poor state that historically has relied on the United Kingdom, Israel and the United States for its survival. Among all Arab governments, Amman has had the longest and closest relationship with Israel — even before it concluded a formal peace treaty with Israel in 1994. In 1970, Jordan waged war against Fatah when the group posed a threat to the kingdom’s security; it also threw out Hamas in 1999 after fears that the group posed a similar threat to the stability of the kingdom. Like Egypt, Jordan also has a vibrant MB, which has closer ties to Hamas than its Egyptian counterpart. As far as Amman is concerned, therefore, the harder Israel hits Hamas, the better.

    Finally, Syria is in a more complex position than these other four Arab states. The Alawite-Baathist regime in Syria has long been a pariah in the Arab world because of its support for Shiite Iran and for their mutual militant proxy in Lebanon, Hezbollah. But ever since the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah, the Syrians have been charting a different course, looking for ways to break free from diplomatic isolation and to reach some sort of understanding with the Israelis.

    For the Syrians, support for Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and several other radical Palestinian outfits provides tools of leverage to use in negotiating a settlement with Israel. Any deal between the Syrians and the Israelis would thus involve Damascus sacrificing militant proxies such as Hezbollah and Hamas in return for key concessions in Lebanon — where Syria’s core geopolitical interests lie — and in the disputed Golan Heights. While the Israeli-Syrian peace talks remain in flux, Syria’s lukewarm reaction to the Israeli offensive and restraint (thus far) from criticizing the more moderate Arab regimes’ lack of response suggests Damascus may be looking to exploit the Gaza offensive to improve its relations in the Arab world and reinvigorate its talks with Israel. And the more da mage Israel does to Hamas now, the easier it will be for Damascus to crack down on Hamas should the need arise.

    With Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and Syria taking into account their own interests when dealing with the Palestinians, ironically, the most reliable patron Sunni Hamas has had in recent years is Iran, the Sunni Arab world’s principal Shiite rival. Several key developments have made Hamas’ gradual shift toward Iran possible:

    Saudi Arabia’s post-9/11 move into the moderate camp — previously dominated by Egypt and Jordan, two states that have diplomatic relations with Israel.
    The collapse of Baathist Iraq and the resulting rise of Shiite power in the region.
    The 2004 Iranian parliamentary elections that put Iran’s ultraconservatives in power and the 2005 election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose public anti-Israeli views resonated with Hamas at a time when other Arab states had grown more moderate.
    The 2006 Palestinian elections, in which Hamas defeated its secular rival, Fatah, by a landslide. When endowed with the responsibility of running an unrecognized government, Hamas floundered between its goals of dominating the Palestinian political landscape and continuing to call for the destruction of Israel and the creation of an Islamist state. The Arab states, particularly Saudi Arabia and Egypt, had hoped that the electoral victory would lead Hamas to moderate its stance, but Iran encouraged Hamas to adhere to its radical agenda. As the West increasingly isolated the Hamas-led government, the group shifted more toward the Iranian position, which more closely meshed with its original mandate.
    The 2006 summer military confrontation between Hezbollah and Israel, in which Iranian-backed Hezbollah symbolically defeated the Jewish state. Hezbollah’s ability to withstand the Israeli military onslaught gave confidence to Hamas that it could emulate the Lebanese Shiite movement — which, like Hamas, was both a political party and an armed paramilitary organization. Similar to their reaction to the current Gaza offensive, the principal Arab states condemned Hezbollah for provoking Israel and grew terrified at the outpouring of support for the Shiite militant group from their own populations. Hezbollah-Hamas collaboration in training, arms-procurement and funding intensified, and almost certainly has played a decisive role in equipping Hamas with 122mm BM-21 Grad artillery rockets and larger Iranian-made 240mm Fajr-3 rockets — and potentially even a modest anti-armor capability.
    The June 2007 Hamas coup against Fatah in the Gaza Strip, which caused a serious strain in relations between Egypt and Hamas. The resulting blockade on Gaza put Egypt in an extremely uncomfortable position, in which it had to crack down on the Gaza border, thus giving the MB an excuse to rally opposition against Cairo. Egypt was already uncomfortable with Hamas’ electoral victory, but it could not tolerate the group’s emergence as the unchallenged power in Gaza.
    Syria’s decision to go public with peace talks with Israel. As soon as it became clear that Syria was getting serious about such negotiations, alarm bells went off within groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, which now had to deal with the fear that Damascus could sell them out at any time as part of a deal with the Israelis.
    Hamas’ relations with the Arab states already were souring; its warming relationship with Iran has proved the coup de grace. Mubarak said it best when he recently remarked that the situation in the Gaza Strip “has led to Egypt, in practice, having a border with Iran.” In other words, Hamas has allowed Iranian influence to come far too close for the Arab states’ comfort.
    In many ways, the falling-out between Hamas and the Arab regimes is not surprising. The decline of Nasserism in the late 1960s essentially meant the death of Arab nationalism. Even before then, the Arab states put their respective national interests ahead of any devotion to pan-Arab nationalism that would have translated into support for the Palestinian cause. As Islamism gradually came to replace Arab nationalism as a political force throughout the region, the Arab regimes became even more concerned about stability at home, given the very real threat of a religious challenge to their rule. While these states worked to suppress radical Islamist elements that had taken root in their countries, the Arab governments caught wind of Tehran’s attempts to adopt the region’s radical Islamist trend to create a geopolitical space for Iran in the Arab Middle East. As a result, the Arab-Persian struggle became one of the key drivers that has turned the Arab states against Hamas.

    For each of these Arab states, Hamas represents a force that could stir the social pot at home — either by creating a backlash against the regimes for their ties to Israel and their perceived failure to aid the Palestinians, or by emboldening democratic Islamist movements in the region that could threaten the stability of both republican regimes and monarchies. With somewhat limited options to contain Iranian expansion in the region, the Arab states ironically are looking to Israel to ensure that Hamas remains boxed in. So, while on the surface it may seem that the entire Arab world is convulsing with anger at Israel’s offensive against Hamas, a closer look reveals that the view from the Arab palace is quite different from the view on the Arab street.

19. obiectiva said

    am January 10 2009 @ 8:18 pm

    Madam, parca era vorba ca te retragi. Am vizionat aseara documentarul lui Oliver Stone PERSONA NON GRATA. Il auzeam foarte frumos pe Sharon spunand ca trebuie sa “NE INVATAM COPIII ISTORIA VIITORULUI, NU A TRECUTULUI”. Pai, atunci ce aia a ma-sii, MAI VOR EVREII ASTIA CU HOLOCAUSTUL LOR, VECHI DE 100 DE ANI?! Eu am dreptul sa spun de evrei ce vreau, ca nimeni nu ma poate invinui de antisemitism. Si mai auzeam pe liderii vostri evrei israelieni spunand, parca tot Sharon ca ” teritoriile acestea sunt obligate sa INTRE IN NEW WORLD” asa! AM gandit ca vorbea de NWO! Asa-i? Asa ca, madam Felicia, vorba unui antescriitor, CIOCU MIC.

20. bo said

    am January 10 2009 @ 10:24 pm

    ce lider hamas sau simplii membrii au fost prinsi….??? ce lider sau membrii alkaida au fost prinsi…???….vreau sa-i vad…vreau sa vad procesul lor…vreau sa vad dreptate…hehe…am vointa. aceste grupari au fost formate si antrenate de CIA, Mosad, MI5, cu anumite obiective clare.In timp s-au tot modificat obiectivele. Cu cine lupta Israelul? cu cine lupta SUA? Ati uitat de fals flag-ul din 9/11, sau cel din Londra?…v-au lamurit cateva fotografii aratate pe toate posturile….vreau sa vad si io inamicul nostru…al planetei mai nou…si vreau sa stiu ce vor de la noi ca poate reusim sa ne intelegem. Razboiul este industrie…si este explatat ca o resursa. Lucrurilr merg intr-o directie total gresita…si nu ma refer doar la acest conflict. O simtiti zilnic. Rutina materialului si efemerului ne tine in paturi, sub patura, la cald.

21. obiectiva said

    am January 11 2009 @ 1:10 pm

    Zionisti contra evrei! Cine vorbeste de antisemitism?
    Premierului israelian Ehud Olmert, persona non-grata pentru Institutul Teologic din Ierusalim
    Luni, 10 Martie 2008 10:25

    Premierului israelian Ehud Olmert, persona non-grata pentru Institutul Teologic din Ierusalim.
    Premierului israelian Ehud Olmert i s-a interzis s? viziteze Institutul Teologic din Ierusalim unde, în urm? cu câteva zile, opt tineri au fost uci?i de un palestinian.

    Decizia a fost motivat? de rabinul-?ef al institu?iei prin faptul c? politica guvernului Olmert contravine înv???turilor din Tora.

    Rabinul Haim Steiner i-a amintit premierului c? Tora, cartea sfânt? a religiei mozaice, interzice cedarea fie ?i a unei palme de p?mânt evreiesc.

    Ieri, ?i ministrul Educa?iei Na?ionale din Israel a încercat s? intre în institu?ie pentru a-?i prezenta condolean?ele, dar a fost gonit de elevii furio?i.

    Institutul Teologic este unul din bastioanele sionismului ultrareligios ?i locul unde s-a conturat mi?carea de colonizare a Cisiordania ?i Fâ?iei Gaza.

22. obiectiva said

    am January 12 2009 @ 6:52 pm

    Dragi tovarasi si preteni daca vreti imagini aveti la dispozitie pagina web: http://palestinalacrimamea.blogspot.com/2009/01/copiii-din-gaza-care-este motivul.html.

23. obiectiva said

    am January 12 2009 @ 7:51 pm

    ?tire: Crucea Ro?ie: Israelul a înc?lcat normele dreptului interna?ional în Gaza

    Comitetul Interna?ional al Crucii Ro?ii a declarat c? i-a fost refuzat de c?tre trupele israeliene accesul c?tre un loc în care au fost g?si?i patru bebelu?i vii, lâng? cadavrele mamelor lor, într-o cas? din Fâ?ia Gaza, distrus? de bombardamentele israeliene.Cincisprezece cadavre au fost recuperate de sub ruinele a trei case ieri în cartierul Zaytun, din Gaza City.
    Pierre Wettach, ?eful Comitetului Interna?ional al Crucii Ro?ii pentru Israel, a descris incidentul de ieri ca “?ocant”.”Armata israelian? trebuie s? fi ?tiut de aceast? situa?ie, dar nu le-a oferit asisten?? r?ni?ilor. Nici m?car nu ne-au permis nou? sau Semilunii Ro?ii palestiniene s? acord?m ajutor r?ni?ilor”, a declarat Wettach.În termeni neobi?nuit de duri, organismul interna?ional cu sediul la Geneva a precizat c?, în opinia sa, Israelul a înc?lcat normele de drept interna?ional cu ocazia acestui incident.”Comitetul Interna?ional al Crucii Ro?ii consider? c?, în acest caz, Israelul nu ?i-a respectat obliga?ia prev?zut? de normele dreptului interna?ional umanitar de a acorda asisten?? ?i de a evacua r?ni?ii. Consider?m întârzierea permiterii accesului echipei de doctori drept inacceptabil?”, se arat? în anun?ul organiza?iei.Ambasadorul Israelului la Geneva a negat acuza?iile. Aharon Leshno-Yaar a declarat agen?iei Associated Press c? “odat? ce activitatea militar? se încheie, este permis accesul echipelor medicale s? evacuete r?ni?ii”.Diplomatul israelian a precizat c? ?ara sa respect? dreptul interna?ional umanitar ?i colaboreaz? cu organiza?iile umanitare în vederea permiterii transport?rii r?ni?ilor ?i c?, în unele cazuri, ace?tia sunt transfera?i la spitale din Israel.

24. m. Pertz said

    am January 12 2009 @ 8:13 pm

    mi-a disparut comment-ul de la amiaza….interesant, erau puse niste link-uri care vorbeau despre declartiile celor de la Fatah despre Hamas….Probabil au fost deranjati cei pro musulmani sau antisemiti….

    http://WWW.JPOST.COM

    consider ca stirile care se dau aici sunt destul de obiective!!!!

25. m. Pertz said

    am January 12 2009 @ 8:29 pm

    Priviti adevarul

    http://cgis.jpost.com/Blogs/must/entry/israel_s_hasbara_efforts_posted

26. obiectiva said

    am January 12 2009 @ 8:46 pm

    D-le Partz! Cu siguranta ca stirile prezentate de israelieni sunt fff obiective!Nu va dispare nici un comentariu, nimeni nu este pro musulman sau antisemit, Doamne Fereste”, pe aceste forumurim dar nici orb. Dar, de libertatea de exprimare si libertatea constiintei, domnia voastra a auzit? Sau in kibbutzuri nu se practica decat comunismul?

27. obiectiva said

    am January 12 2009 @ 8:48 pm

    D-le Partz! Cea mai buna dovada ca nu v-au fost sterse comentariile este ca v-au aparut 2 DOUA! acum. Daca nu stiti sa le postati si va tremura mana de la Alzheimer, nu e problema administratorului.

28. obiectiva said

    am January 12 2009 @ 9:37 pm

    ARDETI ISRAELUL UNDE IL DOARE MAI TARE. LA BUZUNAR!
    COMPANIES TO BOYCOTT

    AOL Time Warner
    Time Life magazine, CNN, ICQ

    Apax Partners
    Jonny Rockets, Sunglass Hut.

    Arsenal Football Club

    Coca-Cola
    Fruitopia, Fanta, Kia Orange, Lilt, Sprite, Sunkist..

    Caterpillar

    Danone
    HP foods, Evian, Volvic, Jacob

    Delta Galil
    Hema, Barbie, Carrefour, Auchan, Tchibo, Victoria’s Secret, GAP, Banana Republic, Structure, J-Crew, JC Penny, Pryca, Lindex, DIM, DKNY, Ralph Lauren, Playtex, cK, Hugo Boss, M&S

    Disney

    Emblaze

    Estée Lauder
    Aramis, Clinique, DKNY, Prescriptives, Origins, MAC, La Mer, Bobbi Brown, Tommy Hilfiger, Jane, Donna Karan, Aveda, Stila, Jo Malone, Bumble & Bumble, Kate Spade

    Home Depot
    Villager’s Hardware, Georgia Lighting, Apex Supply, EXPO Design Centres

    IBM

    Intel

    Johnson & Johnson

    Kimberly-Clark
    Kleenex, Kotex, Huggies, Andrex

    Lewis Trust Group
    River Island, Isrotel hotels, Britannia Pacific

    The Limited Inc
    Express stores, Lerner New York, Structure, New York & Company, Mast Industries, Intimate Brands, Victoria’s Secret, Bath & Body Works, White Barn Candle Company, Henri Bendel

    L’Oreal
    Giorgio Armani, Redken 5th Avenue, Lancome Paris, Vichy, Cacharel, La Roche-Posay, Garnier, Biotherm, Helena Rubinstein, Maybelline, Ralph Lauren, Carson

    Marks & Spencer
    M&S, St.Michaels

    McDonald’s

    Motorola

    Nestle
    Nescafé, Perrier, Vittel, Pure Life, Carnation, Libby’s, Milkmaid, Nesquik, Maggi, Buitoni, Cross & Blackwell, KitKat, Milkybar, Quality Street, Smarties, After Eight, Aero, Polo, Lion, Felix cat food, L’Oréal

    News Corporation
    TV: Fox, Sky, Star, Phoenix, Granada, CNBC. UK newspapers: Standard Newspaper, News of the World, The Sun, The Times. Australian Newspapers: The Telegraph , Gold Coast Bulletin, Herald Sun, Independent, Sunday Mail. US newspapers: New York Post. Publishers: Harper Collins Ragan, Zondervan, National Geographical. Nursery World, Rawkus, NDS, Mushroom Records, ChinaByte.com, Festival Records

    Nokia

    Revlon
    New World Entertainment, Forbes

    Sara Lee
    Hanes, Playtex, Champion, Leggs, Douwe Egberts, Bryan, DIM, Ambi Pur, Bali, Superior Coffee, Just My Size, Kiwi, Maison Cafe, Nur die, Pilao, Lovable, Outer Banks, Wonderbra, Sanex, Pickwick, Gossard, Body Mist, Brylcreem, Aqua Velva, Radox

    Siemens

    Selfridges

    Starbucks
    Seattle Coffee, Pasqua, Hear Music, Tazo

    Timberland

    Boycott List by Brand – View the Labels to boycott

    “Each riyal, dirham …etc. used to buy their goods eventually becomes bullets to be fired at the hearts of brothers and children in Palestine.. To buy their goods is to support tyranny, oppression and aggression.” -Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi

29. m. Pertz said

    am January 12 2009 @ 9:42 pm

    @ “obiectiva”
    am inteles ca parerea mea sau realitatea nu va place, dar numele meu (Pertz) de ce nu va place? Poate ar fi mai bine sa va postati si d-voastra numele real, “Obiectiv (a)” nu reflecta deloc commentu-rile d-voastra

30. m. Pertz said

    am January 12 2009 @ 9:43 pm

    imi place cand se zice ca la noi sunt toti banii

31. obiectiva said

    am January 12 2009 @ 9:48 pm

    Daca mai doriti sa vedeti imagini aveti la dispoyitie patriahotilor.blogspot.com

32. obiectiva said

    am January 12 2009 @ 9:49 pm

    Nu ma intereseaza numele dvs. real. Aici nu discutam CU PERSOANE NON GRATA CI CU CONCEPTII!

33. obiectiva said

    am January 12 2009 @ 9:50 pm

    PS. esti cumva Wiesel? Te anunt ca la timpul WW2 si bunica mea era fata mare.

34. obiectiva said

    am January 12 2009 @ 9:58 pm

    Stiti de ce nu accept razboiul acesta? Pentru ca stiu ca voi, israelienii evrei, sunteti de o lasitate infioratoare. Actionati IN HAITA. Doar asa suntei curajosi. Daca sunteti singuri, va temeti si de un soarece! Ce vina avea acel bebe cu suzeta legata la gat, ca s/a nsacut palestinian? Sau poate in suzeta avea o racheta HAMAS.

35. obiectiva said

    am January 12 2009 @ 10:05 pm

    Cea mai buna dovada a lasitatii lor o veti gasi in faptul ca s-au impuscat singuri.Au murit 3 evrei si 10 au fost raniti pentru ca alti soldati israelieni i-au impuscat. Ce sa ii faci?Accident de munca.

36. obiectivu said

    am January 13 2009 @ 5:27 pm

    Tovarasu obiectiva, sa ne anunti, nene, cand organizezi manifestatia aia cu ars steagurile american si israelian, ca n-as vrea sa ratez ocazia sa vad si io un membru hamas in persoana, si ar fi singura ocazie in care as mai apuca sa povestesc si la altii ce am vazut.

37. Aura said

    am January 14 2009 @ 12:35 pm

    …am citit…si pro si contra…eu zic una..la catzi musulmani sunt pe planeta..daca se enerveaza…disparem cu totzii…

    si oricum…acest schimb de opinii nu ajuta la nimic, dar succes in continuare

38. strajerul said

    am January 26 2009 @ 3:06 pm

    http://www.adevarul.ro/articole/dupa-bbc-sky-news-refuza-sa-difuzeze-un-apel-privind-strangerea-de-fonduri-pentru-gaza.html

Comment RSS · TrackBack URI

Lasa un comentariu