TURN ON FAUX....IDF relased video of a similar building where

[xultar]

shots were fired from not the acutal building they hit.

In other words. They released video of a building that was similiar to but not the one they hit that was next to the building that killed the civilians.

The video was shot on 7/22 also.

[prole100]

1. So, That Justifies The Death Of Innocents?

Fog of war and all.

[xultar]

2. No. I'm posting this cuz people are posting that the IDF released actual

video of shots fired from the building they hit.

Please...don't start with that bullshit.

[prole100]

3. Rhetorical Reply For All The Others That See It Differently

Not You!

[xultar]

4. Then post that in your post.

[prole100]

6. My We Are All Little Sensitive - I Have Never Seen DU So Polarized

eom

[gristy]

8. Probably best if one just says what one means. Clearly.

No rhetoric. No sarcasm. If one does resort to rhetoric or sarcasm and one is misunderstood, one should not blame those who misunderstood.

gristy

[prole100]

9. Thought It Was Clear - One Cannot Censor Oneself Incessantly

So just to be clear, are we becoming incessantly politically correct at DU?

Sure seems that way over this Israel thing.

[last1standing]

15. No but we do have this nifty tool.

It's called an emoticon and looks like this:

:sarcasm:

Give it a try. Oh, and that whole "politically correct" bullshit went out ages ago. Most people realize that was just a neat little bit of wordplay that allowed racists and hatemongers to spew garbage.

[prole100]

18. So, I am Now Being Labeled A Racist And Hatemonger For Using Sarcasm?

It makes the case about political correctness.

[last1standing]

20. I'd try rereading my post before flying off the handle.

I said that the term was invented by racists, not that you were one. I'm saying you, and others, have been desensitized to racist wordplay.

On another note, doesn't this remind you, just a bit, of your subthread with Xultar? Funny how things get twisted....

[prole100]

23. Turn About Is Fair Play - If You Don't Mean Don't Imply It

eom

[last1standing]

25. I'm sure Xultar would agree with you on that.

I think we need an :IRONY: emoticon. :evilgrin:

[gristy]

26. Sarcasm and political incorrectness are two different things.

I gave up sarcasm many years ago and am happier for it, as are the people I interact with.

gristy

[last1standing]

11. Then you weren't around for the 2004 primaries.

This will blow over eventually. Then we can have some relative calm until the 2008 primaries or the next Israeli/Palestinian/Hezbollah/Anyone Else conflagration. That is unless somehow another gun bill gets sent to congress. :evilgrin:

[prole100]

14. Me Bad - Did Not Realize That 2004 Was Worse

Still, I find it difficult to believe that so many are blinded by their rhetorical love for Israel.

[last1standing]

19. People are blinded by a lot of things.

Not the least of them being their own ingrained beliefs. I'm not going to lay all the blame at Israel's feet and I'm not going to pretend their response is justified by any means. The problem on this board is too few are willing to believe there are two parties (really more) with blood on their hands.

Being progressive means being able to look at a problem and try to solve it using both facts and compassion. That means stepping back and seeing that issues aren't usually a matter of black or white, but shades of gray where the two sides interlace.

Good luck to us all.

[prole100]

21. Agreed - Guilty Parties - Bush, Likud, US Fundies, US Govt., Israeli Govt.

Arab Govts., Terrorists ... how many more should we name?

[last1standing]

24. How much time do you have?

That list could go on for quite some time if you want to include the colonizing countries that divided up this and other sections of the world and installed puppets when they had to leave.

Anyone remember Idi Amin?

[wtmusic]

17. No kidding!

The primaries...yikes. :scared:

[last1standing]

22. I would not have wanted to be a moderator during those times.

It was pure Hell here. LOL

[LA lady]

5. They did it in 1996 too....

I guess they can use the same excuse they used in 1996 when they killed over 100 people in Qana:

Israel immediately expressed regret for the loss of innocent lives, saying that the Hezbollah position and not the UN compound was the intended target of the shelling, and that the compound was hit "due to incorrect targeting based on erroneous data." Army Deputy Chief of Staff, Matan Vilnai stated that the shells hit the base not because they were off target, but because Israeli gunners used outdated maps of the area. He also stated that the gunners miscalculated the firing range of the shells.

Prime Minister Shimon Peres claimed that "We did not know that several hundred people were concentrated in that camp. It came to us as a bitter surprise


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_shelling_of_Qana

[eleny]

13. Thanks, xultar. I saw that on CNN earlier

The two analysts (I believe they were retired generals) made it clear that the building in the video was only a building similar to the one that was hit. The video showed what was thought to be a rocket launching vehicle approaching the building. The vehicle was thought to be one of the type that could launch rockets. It was being led by someone on a motorcycle.

I wondered if people would soon begin to assume that it was the actual building.

[madrchsod]

7. my god it`s fox news!

it`s fox news and they can make up the news which ever way they like.

[Igel]

10. It was actually fairly carefully worded. n/t

[Igel]

12. Put well.

Better than most.

It neither says that the building hit wasn't used by Hezbollah, nor does it say that it was.

[warrens]

16. They also said that UN building they blew up was "similar"

To one where rockets had been launched a day earlier. So it was just a little OOPSIE because the building was clearly guilty for looking SIMILAR to another building which had NOTHING TO DO WITH AN ATTACK, JUST HAPPENED TO BE NEARBY.

Psychos. All of them. Israelis should be in the streets to have this murder stopped.