Well it's nice to see anonymous now supports a terrorist group :Hamas is considered a terrorist organization by the U.S., Israel, the UK and the European Union. In the wake of the 2008-2009 Gaza Conflict, in which more than 1,400 people were killed, the United Nations' Goldstone Report found that rocket attacks by Hamas constituted war crimes, and may have amounted to crimes against humanity.
Human Rights Watch has accused Hamas authorities in Gaza of war crimes, of violating international humanitarian law, and of meting out cruel and inhuman treatment to detainees.
Anonymous takes down over 550 Israeli sites, wipes databases
151–158 of 158 posts
Re: Anonymous takes down over 550 Israeli sites, wipes databases
#152Wow, Anonymous taking one side of the conflict and actively helping Hamas terrorists. So stupid move for them. They are just killing the whole idea.
Just another proof that they're no more than a bunch of assholes
Re: Anonymous takes down over 550 Israeli sites, wipes databases
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
> where people were denied the right to have a state to live in You realize Hamas was voted in, right? 1. Elected government? Check. 2. Borders? Check. They have a state. Not being formally recognized in the UN is just that ... a formality.
And you realize that Israel does not recognize any Palestinian state, right ?
So according to your logic, if someone doesn't recognize something, therefore it must not exist?
Re: Anonymous takes down over 550 Israeli sites, wipes databases
#154well done i like it
Re: Anonymous takes down over 550 Israeli sites, wipes databases
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
How about the IPS? http://www.ipsnews.net/2012/11/israeli-firepower-threatens-t... Ooo! How about the BBC? Are they a pro-Palestinian propaganda site too? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20367005 The basic point, which you're overlooking, is that the Palestinian rockets are pretty crappy, and Israel has overwhelming military superiority - look at the casualty list from 2009: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C…
The IPS are predisposed to support the underdog in any conflict, and yes, the BBC are widely regarded as having a pro-Palestinian bias. As for the Electronic Intifada, which you previously cited. I think you can work that one out for yourself. CAMERA have a detailed and objective timeline of recent events: http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=52&#... Problems with the EI narrative: 1) The "unarmed, men…
Well then, I guess reality has a pro-Palestinian bias too. 38 Palestinians killed so far, 257 wounded, mostly civilians, vs. 3 Israeli civilians killed.
Re: Anonymous takes down over 550 Israeli sites, wipes databases
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, they let some through - but not enough to support the people there on anything more than a borderline subsistence level. http://www.ipsnews.net/2010/07/mideast-israel-chokes-gaza-de...
Is there a humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip? No. Israel provides the residents of the Strip with food, water, electricity, medical supplies, etc. The residents respond with rockets aimed at Israeli civilians.
Well then - I guess there's not much point in arguing with you.
Re: Anonymous takes down over 550 Israeli sites, wipes databases
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well it's not as if the heavy bombing of a densely populated defenseless area is healing anything either.
Heavy bombing of densely populated areas? It's rather simple. As a general rule, civilians in the Gaza Strip know if they are near a target. You don't live next to a rocket manufacturing, storage or launch site without knowing about it. The IDF have gone to great pains to warn civilians not to go near these sites, or to mix with combatants. They send text messages, drop leaflets, even make phone calls with recorded m…
"As a general rule, civilians in the Gaza Strip know if they are near a target."
So say, anywhere they are.
http://www.alternet.org/inside-gaza-hospital-israeli-militar...
Re: Anonymous takes down over 550 Israeli sites, wipes databases
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
The IPS are predisposed to support the underdog in any conflict, and yes, the BBC are widely regarded as having a pro-Palestinian bias. As for the Electronic Intifada, which you previously cited. I think you can work that one out for yourself. CAMERA have a detailed and objective timeline of recent events: http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=52&#... Problems with the EI narrative: 1) The "unarmed, men…
Well then, I guess reality has a pro-Palestinian bias too. 38 Palestinians killed so far, 257 wounded, mostly civilians, vs. 3 Israeli civilians killed.
So the side that loses the most people must be right? What sort of twisted logic is this?