Anonymous launches new campaigne against Israel. Discussion

[Wendigo]

Curious what the 8200 will have to say about this business, also. Probably something not as classy as this crap:

http://www.jpost.com/Defense/Article.aspx?id=308921

Probably unleash a virus on the internet aimed at shutting down Anonymous, and invent Skynet. Yeah, that'd be up their alley.

[Agent Thrax]

fuzzyblaa100

Anonymous has apparently restarted its attacks on the Israeli government today... I have always been a supporter of the Israeli state, and a supporter of Anon so this is kinda conflicted for me...

You can see some details here:

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/07/world/meast/israel-cyberattacks/index.html

http://www.salon.com/2013/04/07/anonymous_hits_israel_over_gaza_strikes/

The attacks are ongoing... Anon members say the attacks are being carried out because Israel broke the ceasefire last week. I'm kinda put off about all of it though because Hamas leaders have been praising hackers as supporting a worthy cause. I feel like Anon in no way endorses Hamas...

Basically what they are fighting for is increased awareness of Israels crazy military rhetoric and war crimes. Anon doesn't hate the people of Israel and I feel many anon members support the Jewish State, but the actions being taken against civillians are deplorable.

Also here is a sites currently still shut down due to the hacktivism... Mainly denial of service attacks.

http://www.knesset.gov.il

What do you all think?

Why the ******** do you support Israel? They're evil racist conquerors. Just because your daddy hit you doesn't mean you can go around hitting women.

[Agent Thrax]

Lord Akhenaton

fuzzyblaa100

Wendigo

fuzzyblaa100

When I think of anon ops I generally think of people who are completely separated from issues such as race, creed, or religion.

Why would you think that? They're not robots or space aliens, they're people who spend way too much time on the internet.

What I mean is they try to separate themselves from those things as a means of being personally identifiable... Sure anonymous has religion, and race, and will fight to benefit the propagation of all justice (scientology not included) and just causes.

You mean just causes like punishing people for exercising their first amendment?

What're you on about?

[Agent Thrax]

Trigr Warning

You can support Israeli statehood and not support what Israel is doing.

I do. They should be held responsible for breaking the ceasefire.

How will a compromise ever be reached if this is what they do to their promises?

Very American techniques, though. Colonize an area, exterminate the natives, establish one race and creed as dominant, proceed to oppress quietly.

[God Emperor Baldur]

Agent Thrax

Lord Akhenaton

fuzzyblaa100

Wendigo

fuzzyblaa100

When I think of anon ops I generally think of people who are completely separated from issues such as race, creed, or religion.

Why would you think that? They're not robots or space aliens, they're people who spend way too much time on the internet.

What I mean is they try to separate themselves from those things as a means of being personally identifiable... Sure anonymous has religion, and race, and will fight to benefit the propagation of all justice (scientology not included) and just causes.

You mean just causes like punishing people for exercising their first amendment?

What're you on about?

They leaked private information about the WBC after they picketed the Sandy Hook Funerals.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

Conservative Encyclopedia

Good. The Israeli government needs to be held responsible for its actions.

Like what?

[N3bu]

Suicidesoldier#1

Conservative Encyclopedia

Good. The Israeli government needs to be held responsible for its actions.

Like what?

In general? Killing civilians when it tries to retaliate against HAMAS? Whether we agree with the motivation and intention or not we tend not to just let "collateral damage" just happen without response, or at least we ******** shouldn't.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

N3bu

Suicidesoldier#1

Conservative Encyclopedia

Good. The Israeli government needs to be held responsible for its actions.

Like what?

In general? Killing civilians when it tries to retaliate against HAMAS? Whether we agree with the motivation and intention or not we tend not to just let "collateral damage" just happen without response, or at least we ******** shouldn't.

Like when?

[N3bu]

Suicidesoldier#1

N3bu

Suicidesoldier#1

Conservative Encyclopedia

Good. The Israeli government needs to be held responsible for its actions.

Like what?

In general? Killing civilians when it tries to retaliate against HAMAS? Whether we agree with the motivation and intention or not we tend not to just let "collateral damage" just happen without response, or at least we ******** shouldn't.

Like when?

How about during the Second Intifada?

[Suicidesoldier#1]

N3bu

Suicidesoldier#1

N3bu

Suicidesoldier#1

Conservative Encyclopedia

Good. The Israeli government needs to be held responsible for its actions.

Like what?

In general? Killing civilians when it tries to retaliate against HAMAS? Whether we agree with the motivation and intention or not we tend not to just let "collateral damage" just happen without response, or at least we ******** shouldn't.

Like when?

How about during the Second Intifada?

The statistics aren't really well recorded, and it's assumed that all the people killed were killed by directly connected militant forces, when I imagine a lot of crime/looting etc. was occurring, which is why there was such high civilian casualties.

Since the Israeli did a lot of house to house work, when they could have just bombed the whole region, they were likely trying to avoid civilian casualties, so it's unlikely they had huge wanton civilian casualties.

[N3bu]

I mean, the entire conflict in general has killed something close to 15 thousand people, which is a lot considering Israel is not openly acting like it's committing genocide. Within that number Palestinians woudl outnumber Israeli by at least 8 fold.

Between '87 and 2010, 5 times as many Palestinians civilians died than Israelis (8 thousand to 1.5 thousand) of the Palestinian casualties close to a quarter are under-age. These are figures released by Israel.

How is this even possible is Israel isn't being at the very least somewhat as flippant about civilian deaths as their terrorist enemies. The lack of accountability here is shocking.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

N3bu

I mean, the entire conflict in general has killed something close to 15 thousand people, which is a lot considering Israel is not openly acting like it's committing genocide. Within that number Palestinians woudl outnumber Israeli by at least 8 fold.

Between '87 and 2010, 5 times as many Palestinians civilians died than Israelis (8 thousand to 1.5 thousand) of the Palestinian casualties close to a quarter are under-age. These are figures released by Israel.

How is this even possible is Israel isn't being at the very least somewhat as flippant about civilian deaths as their terrorist enemies. The lack of accountability here is shocking.

It would make sense that in an area attempting to be "liberated" by terrorists there would be heavy civilian casualties. :/

The assumption that Israel is the one causing them is not only unfounded but a tad silly given the situation.

[N3bu]

Suicidesoldier#1

N3bu

Suicidesoldier#1

N3bu

Suicidesoldier#1

Conservative Encyclopedia

Good. The Israeli government needs to be held responsible for its actions.

Like what?

In general? Killing civilians when it tries to retaliate against HAMAS? Whether we agree with the motivation and intention or not we tend not to just let "collateral damage" just happen without response, or at least we ******** shouldn't.

Like when?

How about during the Second Intifada?

The statistics aren't really well recorded, and it's assumed that all the people killed were killed by directly connected militant forces, when I imagine a lot of crime/looting etc. was occurring, which is why there was such high civilian casualties.

Since the Israeli did a lot of house to house work, when they could have just bombed the whole region, they were likely trying to avoid civilian casualties, so it's unlikely they had huge wanton civilian casualties.

There were 3000 Palestinian deaths. IPICT itself can only realistically estimate at most half of those were combatants.

*Avoid* my a**. And before anyone starts citing Israeli casualties as justification, the day we hold Israel to the same condemnation we do HAMAS and rioters is laughably far into the future. We should at least hold them to a better standard. They are after all the government of a first world nation, not a terrorist organisation.

[N3bu]

Suicidesoldier#1

N3bu

I mean, the entire conflict in general has killed something close to 15 thousand people, which is a lot considering Israel is not openly acting like it's committing genocide. Within that number Palestinians woudl outnumber Israeli by at least 8 fold.

Between '87 and 2010, 5 times as many Palestinians civilians died than Israelis (8 thousand to 1.5 thousand) of the Palestinian casualties close to a quarter are under-age. These are figures released by Israel.

How is this even possible is Israel isn't being at the very least somewhat as flippant about civilian deaths as their terrorist enemies. The lack of accountability here is shocking.

It would make sense that in an area attempting to be "liberated" by terrorists there would be heavy civilian casualties. :/

The assumption that Israel is the one causing them is not only unfounded but a tad silly given the situation.

Israel admits that only 1.5 thousand of those Palestinian casualties are caused by Intra-Palestinian violence.

Israel openly admits to killing 6500 Palestinian civilians over the span of 23 years, a significant portion of which, were children. That, should be indefensible. That it is, is disgusting.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

N3bu

Suicidesoldier#1

N3bu

Suicidesoldier#1

N3bu

In general? Killing civilians when it tries to retaliate against HAMAS? Whether we agree with the motivation and intention or not we tend not to just let "collateral damage" just happen without response, or at least we ******** shouldn't.

Like when?

How about during the Second Intifada?

The statistics aren't really well recorded, and it's assumed that all the people killed were killed by directly connected militant forces, when I imagine a lot of crime/looting etc. was occurring, which is why there was such high civilian casualties.

Since the Israeli did a lot of house to house work, when they could have just bombed the whole region, they were likely trying to avoid civilian casualties, so it's unlikely they had huge wanton civilian casualties.

There were 3000 Palestinian deaths. IPICT itself can only realistically estimate at most half of those were combatants.

*Avoid* my a**. And before anyone starts citing Israeli casualties as justification, the day we hold Israel to the same condemnation we do HAMAS and rioters is laughably far into the future. We should at least hold them to a better standard. They are after all the government of a first world nation, not a terrorist organisation.

The sad reality is that HAMAS is likely responsible for more Palestinian deaths than the Israeli forces.

They have no trouble with killing "their own" civilians in suicide bombing attacks, where as Israeli tries to avoid them all the time.


Thus citing the total number of Palestinian civilian casualties is silly because it doesn't imply that Israeli forces are the one's who killed them, it's actually easily explainable how it's the opposite.