Israel's Mark Regev - The new Iraqi Information Minister

[naomiglover]

Does this man ever say anything truthful?

Edited June 16, 2010 by naomiglover

[naomiglover]

Iraqi Information Minister

Channel 4 seems to hold this person accountable. Look at him squirm and try to weasel his way out of it:

[naomiglover]

Regev trying to defend Israel's UN school bombing.

[naomiglover]

Regev was once seen slipping and telling the truth.

Even though he has consistently said otherwise, in this interview, Regev admits that Hamas fired NO rockets during the ceasefire. Not until Israel broke the ceasefire and killed 6 Hamas members:

[M.Dancer]

Hey look....yet another anti israeli thread by Naomi Gusher!

What would be the odds of that?

[naomiglover]

Hey look....yet another anti israeli thread by Naomi Gusher!

What would be the odds of that?

Hey Dancer. Do you ever take notes from Mark Regev?

Many of your comments sound exactly like his.

Was it you who said that no phosphorous was used, and then once the overwhelming evidence came in, including photos and videos, you changed your stance and say that 'okay, it was used, but it was used legally', and then didn't say anything once it was revealed that it was used illegally? Or was that another Mark Regev clone on this forum?

Edited June 16, 2010 by naomiglover

[Bob]

Israel needs to replace Mark Regev. It shouldn't be hard for him to wreck these loaded questions and false allegations from ignorant journalists, yet he seems to be more concerned about being polite and hospitable. He doesn't even seem to have a good grasp of the facts...

[naomiglover]

Israel needs to replace Mark Regev. It shouldn't be hard for him to wreck these loaded questions and false allegations from ignorant journalists, yet he seems to be more concerned about being polite and hospitable. He doesn't even seem to have a good grasp of the facts...

Maybe Israel should hire you.

[M.Dancer]

Was it you who said that no phosphorous was used, and then once the overwhelming evidence came in, including photos and videos, you changed your stance and say that 'okay, it was used, but it was used legally', and then didn't say anything once it was revealed that it was used illegally? Or was that another Mark Regev clone on this forum?

no but it's not like being wrong/dishonesr is abnormal for you...

and it was used legally

[naomiglover]

no but it's not like being wrong/dishonesr is abnormal for you...

and it was used legally

YNet

White phosphorus can be used in land-to-land or sea-to-land shells, which the IDF says are only fired as smoke-screens towards non-populated areas. Phosphorus can also be stored in missiles, which release flakes of the burning substance upon impact. The flakes remain hot up to 24 hours after impact.

The Goldstone report says phosphorus was used in attacks on an UNRWA structure as well as two hospitals in Gaza. The report says a phosphorus shell also hit the home of the Abu-Halima family in al-Atatra.

Image of "the most moral army in the world" using white phosphorus, legally.

Dancer keeps stumping me.

[naomiglover]

Dancer is the Mark Regev of Mapleleafweb.

[segnosaur]

Regev trying to defend Israel's UN school bombing.

I know given your rampant ignorance and bias against Israel you probably didn't know this, but since the initial claims were made, the U.N. has actually backtracked, and admitted that indeed Israel did not attack the school.

Edited to add: Anyone else find it rather ironic that naiomiglover would try to use statements regarding the school attack to discredit Regev, even though Even the U.N. itself has admitted there was no attack on the school?

From: http://www.haaretz.com/news/un-backtracks-on-claim-that-deadly-idf-strike-hit-gaza-school-1.269314

The United Nations has reversed its stance on one of the most contentious and bloody incidents of the recent Israel Defense Forces operation in Gaza, saying that an IDF mortar strike that killed 43 people on January 6 did not hit one of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency schools after all.

...

Questions about the veracity of the claims that the school had been hit by the IDF were also raised last week by the Canadian newspaper The Globe and Mail. The newspaper said that a teacher in the UNRWA compound at the time of the strike "was adamant" that no people had been killed inside the compound.

Additional links can be found here:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/un-disseminates-lies-to-willing-media/story-e6frg71f-1111118746706

Edited June 17, 2010 by segnosaur

[segnosaur]

Regev was once seen slipping and telling the truth.

Even though he has consistently said otherwise, in this interview, Regev admits that Hamas fired NO rockets during the ceasefire. Not until Israel broke the ceasefire and killed 6 Hamas members:

What a completely idiotic and retarded statement.

You do realize that Hamas, as the 'leaders' of Gaza, are responsible for internal security, and as such it is their job to prevent attacks on adjacent territory, even if they did not launch the attacks.

[bloodyminded]

What a completely idiotic and retarded statement.

You do realize that Hamas, as the 'leaders' of Gaza, are responsible for internal security, and as such it is their job to prevent attacks on adjacent territory, even if they did not launch the attacks.

Fifteen sub-state rocket attacks, unrelated to Hamas, in which no Israelis were killed, is justification for the murderous Operation Cast Lead?

And it's funny that, while you give this as justification...Israel itself used a different justification.

Propaganda is not helpful unless you align yourself with the official stance, Segnosaur. If you guys don't keep your story straight, people tend to notice.

Edited June 17, 2010 by bloodyminded

[Bob]

Fifteen sub-state rocket attacks, unrelated to Hamas, in which no Israelis were killed, is justification for the murderous Operation Cast Lead?

And it's funny that, while you give this as justification...Israel itself used a different justification.

Propaganda is not helpful unless you align yourself with the official stance, Segnosaur. If you guys don't keep your story straight, people tend to notice.

Again with the "power of the weak" argument. Hamas and Gaza cannot be held responsible for the rocket attacks since apparently they were executed by non-Hamas organizations. Since it's a broken and inept government, they're absolved of responsibility for the terrorist attacks into Israel via rockets.

So if we follow this logic and accept the supposition that Hamas isn't responsible for the rockets (because either Hamas didn't fire the rockets themselves or didn't offer support for their firings), then Israel now has no right to defend itself by engaging in military action to destroy the infrastructure of terrorism. Bascially, Israel's hands are tied, and, at best, it must trust Hamas to deal with this internal problem on its own (an organization that vigilantly advocates terrorism and rejects Israel's legitimacy).

Do I even need to mention how outrageous your side-note of no Israelis being killed is? What you're suggesting is that until Israelis are killed, Israel has no right to defend itself. Israel doesn't need to wait for its people to be murdered before we can defend ourselves.

Edited June 17, 2010 by Bob

[bloodyminded]

Again with the "power of the weak" argument. Hamas and Gaza cannot be held responsible for the rocket attacks since apparently they were executed by non-Hamas organizations. Since it's a broken and inept government, they're absolved of responsibility for the terrorist attacks into Israel via rockets.

So if we follow this logic and accept the supposition that Hamas isn't responsible for the rockets (because either Hamas didn't fire the rockets themselves or didn't offer support for their firings), then Israel now has no right to defend itself by engaging in military action to destroy the infrastructure of terrorism. Bascially, Israel's hands are tied, and, at best, it must trust Hamas to deal with this internal problem on its own (an organization that vigilantly advocates terrorism and rejects Israel's legitimacy).

Do I even need to mention how outrageous your side-note of no Israelis being killed is? What you're suggesting is that until Israelis are killed, Israel has no right to defend itself. Israel doesn't need to wait for its people to be murdered before we can defend ourselves.

Operation Cast Lead--the subject of my remarks--was not about defense, but about aggression.

Like I said, the rocket attacks were not the reason for the war; we know this because it was Israel, not Hamas, who broke the ceasefire, and then rejected Hamas' proposal to renew the ceasefire; Israel chose instead to attack the civilian population.

Israeli officials admit that rocket attacks were not the cause of the war (though they may have contradicted themselves, as military aggressors often do: see Bush Jr in the lead up to Iraq) so you are accusing the Israeli government of lying...a new and interesting development, to be sure.

Edited June 17, 2010 by bloodyminded

[Bob]

Operation Cast Lead--the subject of my remarks--was not about defense, but about aggression.

Ok, so rockets weren't fired into Israel from Gaza, threatening Israeli lives and property, prior to Operation Cast Lead? Gotcha.

Like I said, the rocket attacks were not the reason for the war; we know this because it was Israel, not Hamas, who broke the ceasefire, and then rejected Hamas' proposal to renew the ceasefire; Israel chose instead to attack the civilian population.

Again, Hamas and Gazans aren't responsible for the rockets fired into Israel pre-Cast Lead (forget about the kidnapping and murder attempts at border crossing, and shootings from the border), but only Israel is responsible for the conflict. Gotcha.

Israeli officials admit that rocket attacks were not the cause of the war (though they may have contradicted themselves, as military aggressors often do: see Bush Jr in the lead up to Iraq) so you are accusing the Israeli government of lying...a new and interesting development, to be sure.

The reasons for going to war aren't that complicated, and I don't care what you think Israel said or didn't say. Gaza is a threat to Israeli security, whether or not you want to acknowledge this. Putting aside Hamas' own proclamations promising the murder of more Israelis via terrorism, we can examine their actions - kidnappings, murders, shooting, and rockets. Not to mention their ongoing acquisition of arms and other tools of terror. In your sick and twisted world, Israel must wait until its citizens are murdered before it is allowed to act - even when the intention of its enemy are clear to see. And even then, when Israel does defend itself in retaliation as well as preventatively, it is "disproportional" because the body count isn't even between terrorists and Jews.

Sir, you are too ignorant and hate-filled. I can't help you. Have a nice life.

[naomiglover]

Ok, so rockets weren't fired into Israel from Gaza, threatening Israeli lives and property, prior to Operation Cast Lead? Gotcha.

There was a ceasefire and Hamas was abiding by the ceasefire until Israel broke it. So the answer to your misinformation is, no.

Even Mark Regev ended up admitting that Hamas was not firing rockets, until Israel broke the ceasefire and killed its members. Why can't you?

[bloodyminded]

Ok, so rockets weren't fired into Israel from Gaza, threatening Israeli lives and property, prior to Operation Cast Lead? Gotcha.

Again, Hamas and Gazans aren't responsible for the rockets fired into Israel pre-Cast Lead (forget about the kidnapping and murder attempts at border crossing, and shootings from the border), but only Israel is responsible for the conflict. Gotcha.

Actually, no, they aren't solely responsible. The only one making a one-sided argument is you.

The reasons for going to war aren't that complicated, and I don't care what you think Israel said or didn't say.

It has nothing to do with what I "think" Israeli officials said or didn't say. I don't control objective reality and the statements of other people.

In your sick and twisted world, Israel must wait until its citizens are murdered before it is allowed to act - even when the intention of its enemy are clear to see. And even then, when Israel does defend itself in retaliation as well as preventatively, it is "disproportional" because the body count isn't even between terrorists and Jews.

Sir, you are too ignorant and hate-filled. I can't help you. Have a nice life.

If you think I'm hate-filled, as well as sick and twisted, I think you might not be seeing things too clearly. (My "ignorance" is another matter: I'm always willing to concede that possibility.)

But you're wrong about what you charge here: that I don't care about Jewish people, or worse, that I think they must be killed before Israel can act in self-defense. As I thought was clear, we simply don't agree on when Israel is acting in genuine, good-faith self-defense; further, we disagree on Israel's methods.

These are important matters, to be sure, but your placing sinister attributions upon my intent ("sick," twisted," hate-filled," etc) is simply not true.

Further, of the two of us, you're the only one to have displayed clear and overt racism and hate.

Perhaps you you suffer from that all-too common failure of imagination: you assume my motives must be similar to your own?

[segnosaur]

Fifteen sub-state rocket attacks, unrelated to Hamas, in which no Israelis were killed, is justification for the murderous Operation Cast Lead?

Ummm... once again... Hamas formed the government in Gaza. As such, they are responsible for law and order. Firing rockets off into foreign territory is an act that most governments would attempt to put a stop to.

So, who do you think is responsible for providing law and order in Gaza? If you seem to think Hamas has no responsibility to stop attacks from Gaza soil, then who does?

Oh, and you seem to think "fifteen rocket attacks" can be ignored. So, tell me, how many rocket attacks is a number before you'd agree military action is justified? Give me a number.... What about 20? 50? 100?

And it's funny that, while you give this as justification...Israel itself used a different justification.

Well, the kidnapping of Israeli citizens might have something to do with it, yeah. Most countries would frown on seeing people taken like that.

Like I said, the rocket attacks were not the reason for the war; we know this because it was Israel, not Hamas, who broke the ceasefire...

Really? So what exactly do you think Hamas meant when they said: "The ceasefire is over and there won't be a renewal..."

And what do you think the Hamas spokesman meant when they said: "there is no chance of extending the calm"?

And what do you think Israeli spokesman said when they said "We hope the truce can be applied again"?

You know, if someone actually looked at the statements made by Hamas and Israel, they'd actually conclude that Israel was the one wanting the cease fire to continue. I guess they don't have the awesome mind reading ability that you do.

Oh, and by the way, how many peaceful governments, in the middle of a truce, decide to dig secret, illegal tunnels into the territory of the country they are "at peace" with and kidnap people? How dare that Evil Israeli government, actually trying to protect its citizens from kidnapping!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7791100.stm

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28298689/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7712552.stm

Oh, and by the way, here's a time line which also shows that it was Hamas that declared the end of the truce, even before it officially expired....

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE50423320090105

Edited to add: I know you claimed that "rocket attacks were not the reason for the war", but keep this statement in mind from their defense minister: We have no intention of accepting the situation as it is developing in Gaza and we have no intention of accepting a continuation of fire on the Gaza envelope communities. (Defense Minister Ehud Barak... see: http://www.haaretz.com/news/strikes-on-negev-drop-as-hamas-holds-24-hour-truce-1.285531) So, it looks like the defense minister himself has said that the rocket attacks are at least part of the reason for Operation Lead Cast.

Edited June 18, 2010 by segnosaur

[segnosaur]

There was a ceasefire and Hamas was abiding by the ceasefire until Israel broke it. So the answer to your misinformation is, no.

Wrong. It was Hamas that actually declared the end of the cease fire. Israel wanted to extend it. The links given in my post to bloodyminded illustrate this.

Oh, and just out of curiosity, how many ceasefire agreements do you know give permission of one side to dig secret, illegal tunnels to the other side to kidnap people? After all, that's what Hamas was doing. Personally, I think most countries would frown on that sort of thing.

Can you point me to the part of the Israel-Hamas cease fire agreement that says "Hamas has the right to dig illegal tunnels into Israeli soil in order to kidnap soldiers"?

[Bonam]

There was a ceasefire and Hamas was abiding by the ceasefire until Israel broke it. So the answer to your misinformation is, no.

Even Mark Regev ended up admitting that Hamas was not firing rockets, until Israel broke the ceasefire and killed its members. Why can't you?

This is ridiculously dishonest. Groups within Gaza were firing rockets.

It would be like saying "Israel isn't building settlements in the West Bank!". After all, it's not "Israel" doing it but just the settlers. Therefore, Israel should be held blameless. Would you agree with such a statement? Of course not. And yet you hypocritically make the exact same argument on behalf of Hamas.

Just as Israel and its government is responsible for the actions of its people, so too is the government of Gaza responsible for what happens in Gaza. Hamas is nominally the government of Gaza. If rockets are launched from Gaza, Hamas is responsible, whether they directly ordered the launch of those rockets or not.

[segnosaur]

Israeli officials admit that rocket attacks were not the cause of the war...

Just in case my last post didn't do enough to debunk your flawed assessment of the situation, here is a official Israeli military web site:

From: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Terrorism+and+Islamic+Fundamentalism-/Aerial_strike_weapon_development_center+_Gaza_28-Dec-2008.htm

The Air Force activity came as a result of the continuation of terror activity by Hamas terror organization from the Gaza Strip, and the duration of rocket launching and targeting Israeli civilians.

See that part in bold? So it looks like rocket attacks were, according to the Israeli military, a reason for military action in Gaza.

So, where exactly are your quotes from those officials claiming rocket attacks were not the cause?

(though they may have contradicted themselves,

Nope, no contradictions.

There were multiple reasons to send the military into Gaza... rocket attacks, kidnappings, the digging of illegal tunnels, statements from Hamas saying "the cease fire is over".

The fact that someone mentions only one reason does not necessarily mean that those other reasons don't exist and aren't also valid.

[Bob]

This is ridiculously dishonest. Groups within Gaza were firing rockets.

It would be like saying "Israel isn't building settlements in the West Bank!". After all, it's not "Israel" doing it but just the settlers. Therefore, Israel should be held blameless. Would you agree with such a statement? Of course not. And yet you hypocritically make the exact same argument on behalf of Hamas.

Just as Israel and its government is responsible for the actions of its people, so too is the government of Gaza responsible for what happens in Gaza. Hamas is nominally the government of Gaza. If rockets are launched from Gaza, Hamas is responsible, whether they directly ordered the launch of those rockets or not.

Exactly.

[Bob]

I must say I am shocked at the amount of understanding and support (rooted in real knowledge) for Israel that I'm seeing here in these forums. I've been to some other forums before, and the amount of pure ignorance, anti-Zionism and anti-semitism is abhorrent. Either you're all a bunch of Jews, or something, somewhere, has compelled you to make honest efforts to research and understand this conflict.

Clearly the default and ignorant perspective on this issue is to view all people as the the same and equal, therefore the apparently downtrodden Palestinians and Arabs are victims of something (Israel and American support). It's the grade-school support-the-underdog mentality. When I see people supporting Israel's legitimate rights to live in security I always assume that this position was arrived at after serious research and and honest approach, contrary to the knee-jerk support of the apparent victims (Arabs) of the ignorant koombaya-chanters.