This Is the ISRAELI INTELLIGENCE, We're Supposed to Trust

Sounds like a stretch to me. Besides, the palistinians aren't exempt from culpability of hamas and other terrorism. They have a responsibility to police their own and failure to do so invites such a response.

 

More anti semetism masked as compassion

 

The kids too? I don't see much of a difference between Hamas murdering innocent people with machetes and Zionists doing it with artillery...

How do you suggest the Palestinians 'police their own'?

 

Did you know Hamas was created and often funded by Israeli intelligence as a means to discredit the considerably less violent PLO? Do you think Israeli society approves of that?

 

Nonsense. Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

No, I'm not asking you to disseminate my words-- I'm challenging you to back up your claims, about what I had said. But, of course you won't, we can be sure: not only because, as usual, your claims are nothing but baseless bullshit; but also because you never do back up your garbage charges. Here was a previous instance, in which I was addressing you:

For review-- because I myself had forgotten what nonsense you have now been spouting-- here are your comments, that you apparently cannot justify:

Tipper101 said: ↑
I don’t really see how an intelligence screw up is a justification for letting Israel get wiped off the planet

-- which absolutely no one is suggesting, except you; and:

Tipper101 said: ↑
but Jew haters aren’t really known for crossing their T’s and dotting their I’s when it comes to their own intelligence.

The reason that I cannot back up your quote is because, as I had said, suggesting that I am Jew hater, is nothing but bullshit. I do not hate any racial, ethnic, religious, or national group. Your silence, when I ask what gives you the impression I hate Jews, is all the proof of that anyone capable of rational thought needs, to know that your contention was nothing but a slanderous lie. Apparently you lack even that minimal degree of reasoning capacity, to understand this; hence, instead of not answering my challenge (or being smart, and ethical, and decent enough, to not issue your false allegation, to begin with), you come back with your frivolous response, here.

But you can be, you prove in your next paragraph, even more pathetic than that:

I love it! You make the charge, against me, that something I have said in this thread, is a basis to think that I hate Jews. You refuse to cite what words of mine you are using to justify this ridiculous assertion. And then you try to make out that I should need to have to disprove your allegation, which you won't even offer a quote of mine, to support.

*Do you not recognize that it is you whom you describe, who "can't come up with any proof?" Who just wants to hurl baseless charges, because she believes she can know others' "true intentions," no matter how many times, she is proven wrong?

I have to begin to wonder if your posting is done to satisfy some masochistic craving on your part, to publicly display how utterly pathetic of an unthinking mess, you are.

But here you go, . I went back to October 7, and picked out the first ones I saw. This doesn't even cover the first week; I have many more. But, it would seem like you are the one, who has something to prove, since you are making the incendiary charge against me. So I'll leave further investigation to you. I will just offer these to prove that:

1) You are always wrong; and make false accusations;
2) I am not only innocent of your baseless slurs, but will always be able to show your arguments to be worthless;
3) I am the only one of us, with any decency, integrity, or class:

Which, of course, I just showed to be wrong-- already racking up more proof for my first contention, above, that you are always wrong, and make false allegations. Honestly, most would expect more from a five year old, than we get from you.

Glad to hear it-- 'cause I did just prove you wrong, but I doubt that you had loved reading those snips of my posts, as the honesty of that claim of yours, is as dubious as most (I guess I should have included a fourth Tipper fact). But I would love you to prove me wrong, in my #3 contention, above, by your actually having the decency to admit that you were wrong, and the class apologize for insinuating that I was a "terrorist supporter," or a Jew hater. But I don't expect that I will see that; because you project much more about the true nature of "people like" you, than you think you are picking up, about others.

 

Here is what probably happened IMO. The ZIONISTS controlling the Israeli government DISINGENUOUSLY decided to "ignore" the "warnings" because they WANTED their own "9/11" in order to JUSTIFY their genocidal ELIMINATION of the ENTIRE Gaza Palestinian population.

That type of CYNICAL disregard for human life is commonplace among religious ZEALOTS of ALL denominations,

The FAILURE to PREPARE and the DEPARTURE of the troops beforehand are Red Flags that this was a DECISION by the Zionist LEADERSHIP.

 

Excellent post!

 

LOL-- it is your post, which is propaganda: every publication with a story that makes Israel in any way look bad, is "anti-Zionist?" Are you sure it couldn't be that not absolutely everything, done by all Israelis, is beyond any legitimate reproach or criticism, whatsoever? If I reacted by calling every publication with a negative story about the U.S., "anti-American," I'm sure you would recognize that I was being ridiculously nationalistic & partisan. Why are Israelis immune from that?

The report in the Times, is about actual documents, emails, transcripts: it is all factual; it is in no part editorialized. If it were bogus, why is not the Israeli government condemning it as utterly false? There is nothing anti-Semitic, in noting that Intelligence was not regarded with due seriousness-- the same charges, the article notes, were made against U.S. Intelligence, after 9/11. You are far too sensitive about this, and are reacting irrationally.

Do you not believe that there is blame to be laid on your government, for missing this attack, in its planning stages, and for transferring IDF troops away from the border fence? If not, you differ from most other Israelis! Must they all be anti-Zionists, as well? Isn't Haaretz, btw, an Israeli publication?

This has nothing to do with the Times article: it is not about motivations, or laying moral blame for the attack, whatsoever. Did you somehow musunderstand that this was looking at things only from a security & intelligence perspective? Speaking of which: if "everybody in Israel knew" that this was exactly what Hamas wanted to do, doesn't that make the removal of IDF troops from protecting the border, seem all the less reasonable?

 

Anyone who would fall for this type of nonsensical argument from the OP would be the same type of person who would have argued not to attack Japan just because we should have known about Pearl Harbor. It’s moronic. And I agree with funding Israel to help them from a constant threat. How many countries were willing to give us assistance after 9-11? We can help them too.

 

Speaking of "moronic"-- the OP does not make the "nonsensical argument" which you contend. So apparently someone should probably go back to their Dr Seuss reading material, if this is too difficult for them to understand.

Even though your general statement about helping Israel is not really inapplicable to the thread, or else is very poorly defined and argued-- hey, your penmanship is completely legible, so good for you!

 

You make the nonsensical argument to stop funding. It’s the same thing. Using hindsight to attack a country that was attacked like a good little leftist puppet and no capability to make your own mind up without a puppet master. It’s sad. Not hard to know how you will vote cause you likely haven’t thought for yourself a day in your life.

 

You're right. The Clinton administration warned the incoming Bush administration about the threat but it wasn't taken seriously enough and 9/11 succeeded.

 

How does that justify the October 7 attack by Hamas?

 

I don't think it is that simple. Again, let's take the approach that Israeli intelligence believed this to be credible, actionable intelligence. What should Israel have done in that case? Attack Hamas directly? Put forces on alert constantly, which would create confusion and morale problems within the military. Or ignore it until such actions become evident? None of the options are winnable to Israel, especially putting the military on alert constantly. That puts a strain on the morale of the military, not to mention sowing confusion. Externally, the media would have had a field day thinking that this was political to keep someone in power. We have seen this with our version of "October Surprise" done by Reagan, Clinton, and Bush.

The other side is they did not take the information seriously, and dismissed it for whatever reason. It may be complacent, but to find out for sure, an investigation by the Kisset should happen to make those determinations. They need to have the intelligence Colonel explain why he dismissed it. What was their thinking? Etc. What you posted is this possibility; so, I will not go into further explanation on this side. But my suspiciion is that this is a outcome of internal Israeli Politics in which the Military may have been holding onto this info to make sure a certain person is back in power. It is no secret that the intelligence and the military prefer Netanayu than anyone else as PM. So, I suspect that had something to do with this. If the intelligence discovered this in October 2022 or prior, Netenayu was not in power, someone else was. So, that PM has has some explaining to do as well and that is where the complancy may start.

 

intelligence failure=extrapolate that to conspiracy=extrapolate that to pull all funding and let the Jews die.

It really really doesn’t take much to sign the anti-Jews up for letting Jews die.

I think they’re better off claiming .005% dead civilians by the word of the terrorists they think have awesome intelligence and should always be believed equals genocide.

 

Can't trust a media source that employs a journalist who admires Hitler. You missed that part.

The English edition of Haaretz and 972 Magazine are both extreme left. Just like their far-right counterparts, they follow ideology rather than reality.

 

He did, you just ignored it.

 

What makes you think I’d take the word of you? Do you matter more than he does? What makes you think that?

 

Well Hamas is an offshoot of the MB, but that didnt stop Israel from funding it with taxpayer money 'to counterbalance the Marxism of the PLO'...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/07/30/how-israel-helped-create-hamas/
https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/hamas-israels-own-creation/

 

Quote it-- that is the reason for that function existing (btw). I only make the argument, that it is certainly in our interests to understand who will be deciding how to use our aid. This is similar to the idea-- well understood by most, if not necessarily by you-- that one does not give a loaded gun to a child, who has, for example, demonstrated poor impulse control. Or one who is notoriously bad at following directions, etc. Who is calling the shots, for Israel? Is the government/security structure inept? Does it have some anti-Palestinian agenda? Or some (personal) political agenda? These are legitimate questions, under the circumstances.

Your trying to make an analogy to either 9/11 or Pearl Harbor, does not hold water; what country did we expect to fund our military, after either of those events?

BTW, and more applicably worth considering-- before the end of our marathon wars in the Middle East, a lot of our partners had become fed up with the way we conducted things. Can you see that analogy? Shouldn't we be clear on what it is, we are supporting (or potentially getting dragged into)?

I do not agree with your apparent position, of that we should throw money at Israel, because we feel sorry for them. Just curious-- what is your stance on humanitarian aid to Palestinians, being tied to military aid to Israel? And what do you think about our insistence that there he some plan to change the status quo of Gaza internment of Palestinians, and West Bank Apartheid?

 

Maybe so. Netanyahu will be replaced by a more militarily aggressive leader that wouldnt allow Hamas to pull off such an attack.

 

Sure, if that makes you feel better. Once he's not selfserving nor corrupt, no harm.

 

And why would you be demonizing the Israel’s then mentioning aid for any other reason than to support the idea that aid should not be given? You think demonizing them will increase aid?

It’s obvious you want to not give aid because you think your hindsight erases their right to self defense? Literally attacking those who were attacked first just because they didn’t think it was going to happen. I don’t even know why I jumped into this topic. Has to be one of the dumbest threads I have ever put my eyes on. Then you try and walk back your intent that’s obvious as hell. It doesn’t surprise me. Not at all.

 

I will repeat once more: if you would like to have a conversation, or even a contentious debate, with me, I will require you to either learn the meaning of the words you use (such as "demonizing"), so that I will not consider your paraphrasings to be misrepresentative of my posts, or else for you to quote the posts, which support your characterizations (which, of course, is always the safe bet). My bringing to people's attention, this article about what appears grave ineptitude, on the part of Israeli Homeland Security (so to speak), is not a demonization. Perhaps, look up the word, before using it.

Even my suggesting the possibility that there might be anything more at play here, than just incredible negligence, incompetence, and the reliance on outmoded assumptions about Hamas capabilities, would not be a "demonizing" of Israel or its people, in general: if this massive security lapse had, indeed, been helped by some politician, it should be obvious that this would be an indictment, of only that one politician, or the small cadre, of he & his collaborators. Your argument would be saying that anyone who had accused our President Nixon, for instance, of covering up crimes, or LBJ of misrepresenting the Gulf of Tonkin incident, would have been demonizing America or Americans-- hogwash!